Should a surrogate mother be able to keep her baby?
I believe the genetic parents have the first right to the baby. The surrogate mother may have carried it, but it belongs to the genetic parents. It is different from a sperm donor. A sperm donor does no anonymously with the understanding that he doesn’t get the child, he’s just doing a good thing. If there is a contract, what the surrogate is doing is illegal. It is not her baby, she is kidnapping it if she takes it. And she is a womb-to-rent. That is the definition of a surrogate mother: someone who is allowing a couple to use her womb for 9 months and then taking the baby.
I have opinions based on different terms: If the child in the womb is made from someone elses egg and sperm (not hers) then no, the surrogate should not legally be able to keep the child. Technically the child isn’t hers, she only carried it (womb for rent, basically). If the child was made from her egg, then she should have the option – however it’s a sticky situation because the father may not have consented to that and does not want to have a child with the surrogate. Its unfair for the father, and not to mention it’s letting down the woman who is unable to have her own child. Overall, contracts are made to be abided by. If the surrogate thinks she might have a change of mind then there should be a part of the contract where she can keep the baby – at no charge to the father for providing his sperm. I think it’s morally wrong to say YES I will help you have a baby, and then change her mind. She can have a baby on her own terms, not other people’s.
