Debate on Surrogate Motherhood

The practice of bearing a child on behalf of another woman. This is surrogate motherhood. Is it considered immoral? By some, yes. In some countries it is banned--and in others it is promoted or up for consideration.

In recent days, the issue of 'right and wrong' has surfaced in the midst of this argument, sharing different meanings to the opposing sides. To some, it is right only for the woman who brings forth life to raise the child; for it is deemed that she is the only one fit to be the child's mother. Clearly, we must indeed recognize this side of the argument.

But to those with that viewpoint, that is the end of the argument. They do not see any reason for the issue to be continued further; rather, to end the debate and declare anyone who disagrees to lack morals or values.

But have those who preach this anti-surrogate moralism ever experienced what it would be like to be those on the other side of this issue? Suppose, for a moment, that they were the ones who were incapable of having children. Would they condemn themselves the way that they condemn others if they were in another predicament? It is surely easy to say what one would do in any situation, but one can never know exactly what they would do until that situation comes.

How many of you have ever held a small child in your arms and looked into its small eyes and felt the love that you had for it. Perhaps it was a younger sibling, perhaps even a child of your own. You know how much that you love that little one. And of course, you all know how much the child's mother loves it.

What must it be like, I ask you, to be a mother or a father and know that you will never have a son or a daughter to hold and call your own? Knowing that you will never be able to raise a child and love it must be a terrible nightmare for any caring and decent person who wishes to have a child. What is wrong then, with having a woman give birth to a child that she cannot care for and give it to a wanting mother and father who cannot have a child of their own.

What difference is it between surrogate-motherhood and adoption? There is none. Adoption is legal, and is highly respected among people from many walks of life. Pro-choice and Pro-life supporters herald adoption as a way of taking care of children in need. Why then, should anyone who supports adoption attack another option for a mother that is the same?

Surrogate motherhood provides good and decent parents who cannot otherwise have children the opportunity of loving and raising a child and giving it a kind and loving home. Imagine being a woman who has been told that you are no longer capable of having a child--you know that surrogate motherhood is the only way in which you will ever have a child. I ask, What right do any of us have to deny a woman who cannot have a child the right to receive a child to raise and call her own. I ask, What right to any of us have to deny a man the opportunity to be a father and to raise his son or his daughter. We have no right to deny parents the opportunity to have children! Consider all of the children in orphanages who are alone and feel unloved. What right do we have to deny them of loving parents? And how is it possible that we can allow child-molesters and abusive parents to bear and raise children and deny good unfortunate couples the right to raise a child. Such an idea is ludicrous and insane!

All that we need to do is reason a little to understand that surrogate-motherhood is a perfect way for men and women to raise and love children that it is otherwise impossible for them to have. We have adoption, which is very similar to surrogate motherhood. We have grandparents and aunts and uncles who raise children. Why on earth can't we allow good and decent people the opportunity to raise and love children as well? It is all perfectly legitimate and decent to allow people to parent and love a child, and who can argue that raising and loving a child is wrong?

Thank-you for hearing the voice of compassion and reason.