Surrogate mothers

[Ansgar]

I was just watching a medical program feauturing a surrogate mother and I came to wonder, what does the Church say about this?

[Shanghaiski]

I was just watching a medical program feauturing a surrogate mother and I came to wonder, what does the Church say about this?

No.

Edit--At least, I hope it would. Most likely you will get a more wishy-washy/diplomatic answer. I've known Orthodox who have unfortunately utilized artificial means of conception. But there are so many bad moral decisions leading up to that occurrence. If conception cannot happen naturally, then, I think, a couple should adopt if they would like children. Just because one can do otherwise, does not mean that one should.

[serb1389]

basically the answer is no.

here is a very balanced view of it from Fr. Stanley Harakas:

http://www.stnina.org/node/441

The introduction of third parties - sperm donors or surrogate mothers, whether they supply the ovum or not - violate the integrity of the union of body and soul of the married couple.

[ialmisry]

I support the idea of surrogate, rather, adoptive mothers, for the snowflake babies
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snowflake_babies
for the simple reason that otherwise they will die (of course, I would ban the processes that results in these "surplus embryos," but that is another matter). But rent-a-womb, no.

[serb1389]

I support the idea of surrogate, rather, adoptive mothers, for the snowflake babies
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snowflake_babies
for the simple reason that otherwise they will die (of course, I would ban the processes that results in these "surplus embryos," but that is another matter). But rent-a-womb, no.

Maybe i'm not understanding this correctly, but if you read further in the article, you see:

The resulting child is considered the child of the woman who carries it and gives birth, and not the child of the donor. This is the same principle as is followed in egg donation or sperm donation.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embryo_adoption

Obviously i'm speaking to embryo adoption, but in the snowflake babies article it said that they are the same thing. 

I just don't understand how the resulting child is considered of the woman to whom the embryo is given.  Wasn't the embryo inseminated already?  and isn't the womb of the mother just being used?  that would seem to me that she is bearing someone else' child.  Maybe i'm not understanding something here. 

[akimori makoto]

I just don't understand how the resulting child is considered of the woman to whom the embryo is given.  Wasn't the embryo inseminated already?  and isn't the womb of the mother just being used?  that would seem to me that she is bearing someone else' child.  Maybe i'm not understanding something here. 

Father, not being American, I'm only guessing, but there are probably statutes which create certain "presumptions" of parenthood in law.

For instance, the legal father of a child is presumed to be the husband of the natural mother unless there is evidence to rebut the presumption.

In New South Wales, I think it used to be the case that the "surrogate" mother was presumed to be the legal mother of the child, but that probably changed with the recent amendments to the surrogacy laws. I know that in times past, it was necessary for the genetic parents (the sperm and egg donors) to actually adopt their own child once it was born from the surrogate.

[Tags:]

OrthodoxChristianity.net > Moderated Forums > Faith Issues (Moderator: Michał Kalina) > Topic: Surrogate mothers