Surrogacy As An Immoral And Unjustifiable Act example essay topic

Surrogate motherhood refers to that condition of a fertile (footnote) woman who has been contracted to become impregnated via reproductive technologies such as donor or artificial insemination. It is that condition wherein that fertile woman also has agreed to transfer her rights on the child to the biological parents after giving birth. This is bounded by a contract that was signed by the contracting parents and the surrogate. The reasons for this generally fall into two categories. Either the contracting couple is unable to produce a child or they would prefer to eliminate or enhance certain genetic traits. My argument would apply to either case.

For the purpose of this paper, the motivations are irrelevant and the logic following applies to both. The possibility of surrogacy has gotten people into quite a tizzy with furious debates concerning issues such as the comm edification of a woman's reproductive organs, the physiological & psychological harm, and its social impacts on a religious definition of marriage. I will defend the claim that surrogacy is an immoral action which places a socially constructed and therefore arbitrary value on the natural phenomenon of human reproduction, the implications of viewing the natural in terms of the artificial can be seen through the increase psychological and health risks of the women that contract. Prior to discussing the ethical issues, I must discuss the scientific process involved. There are actually various types of reproductive technologies women can undergo. These would include, as mentioned earlier, donor or artificial insemination, assisted hatching, in vito fertilization, game tra fallopian transfer, zygote intra fallopian transfer, intra cytoplasmic sperm injection and embryo micro manipulation.

These are actually the technologies employed in the process of surrogacy (Hinman, 2001). Surrogacy or surrogate motherhood, like reproductive technologies, can be further classified as gestational surrogacy, traditional surrogacy, and egg donation. Gestational surrogacy, as defined by various references, would refer to the surrogacy condition wherein there in absolutely no genetic link between the child and the carrier. This may be in the form of the following (Canadian Surrogacy Options, Inc.) Traditional surrogacy, on the other hand, would refer to the surrogacy condition wherein the carrier actually has a genetic link to the child. The surrogate concurs with the arrangement that the intended father's sperm inseminate her and would transfer and or terminate her parental rights over the child to the intended mother. It is also said that with this type of surrogacy, the intended mother enters into a step parent type of adoption (Canadian Surrogacy Options, Inc).

Lastly, egg donation, would refer to the condition or process of maintaining a database for potential egg donors (Canadian Surrogacy Options, Inc.) For the purposes of this discussion, each of these engages in the commodification of the reproductive agency and human reproduction by legally and socially justifying a condition in which this capacity may become fungible. (FOOT NOTE) Mother's egg, father's sperm - this type of surrogacy is usually employed in cases wherein the mother is not capable of carrying a fertilized egg for medical reasons. Donor egg, father's sperm - a type of surrogacy that is employed when there is doubt on the quality of the egg or there are no available ovaries for fertilization. Mother's egg, donor sperm - this is the opposite of donor egg, father's sperm. This is actually taken into consideration when there is doubt in the quality of the father's sperm.

Donor egg, donor sperm - is the type of surrogacy chosen by intended parents who would want to establish a genetic link with the child. Surrogate motherhood became popular in the 1980's. This was popularized by the case of Baby M, which primarily dealt on the ethical issues raised regarding reproductive technology. Surrogacy is actually being used as a tool, medium, and or option taken by infertile couples who would not want to engage themselves into the process of adopting a child due to the failure of the wife or the husband or both to produce fertile gametes that would enable them to procreate life (Squire, 1989).

Surrogacy, as mentioned earlier, is made possible via hiring a fertile woman who would become the carrier of the said fertilized gametes and would be responsible of delivering the offspring to the world after the nine months gestation period for the biological or contracting parents. Surrogate motherhood is now being practiced by developed countries like the US and some other parts of the European continent and according to various references; surrogacy is actually a legal practice. Women who have agreed to become surrogates are paid for their participatory role and for the expenses they have incurred during the nine months gestation period. However, although the said reproductive technology has been legalized it entailed endless debates on whether it can be qualified as a moral and just act especially on the part of the surrogates (Richardson, 1987). Those who advocate the practice of surrogacy claim that it is a moral and just act since people who are burdened by the frustration of not being able to procreate are actually being addressed.

With surrogacy, infertile couples are actually provided the joys of parenthood. Likewise, it is also said that surrogacy does not necessarily have to be equated with money. With the aid of laws and existing public policies regarding it, it is also claimed that the possibility of commercialization and the development of a market for it can be controlled and at the same time access to the said reproductive technology is made possible for anyone who would like to avail it (web). On the other hand, for those groups of people who strongly opposes the use such reproductive technology, claim that surrogacy is wrong for it connotes baby selling, reproductive organs are treated as a commodity, and so on and so forth.

Likewise, according to them, surrogacy makes parenthood become a fundamental right. Moreover, it actually led to commercialization wherein fertile women where found to hire out their wombs to the highest bidder. It could also lead to a confusing and damaging situation to child once he or she discovers the nature of his or her birth. These are only few of the main reasons why some people would take technology as unjust (Ragone, 1994). Janet McDowell and others argue that surrogate arrangements are immoral because the act itself deviates from the normal process of procreation which is the union of married couples by means of sexual act or intercourse.

Likewise, it not only reflects some misunderstanding of the nature of procreation but also its fundamentals and primary purpose as well as the responsibilities attached to it. Furthermore, love and commitment of the surrogate to the child's biological father does not materialize as well as the care of the surrogate to child she is bearing. Thus, this qualifies it to be considered merely as biological procreation of babies and it degrades the dignity of human procreation and human capacities (McDowell, Janet). Surrogate motherhood invalidates the religious societal standard of having a marital relationship. Surrogacy may enable the existence of same sex couples. This group argues that surrogacy is immoral because it sacrifices the intended purpose of the union of a man and woman in the sacrament of matrimony, which is to "go forth and multiply" or in other words to procreate.

This argument, however well thought out, entirely misses the point, insofar as religious affiliation tends to correlate geographically, we can assume that the evolution of religious logic is somehow socially and therefore artificially constructed. One can still maintain that surrogacy is immoral without appeal to unresolved metaphysical disputes. In the case of the surrogate mother, surrogacy and the arrangements entailed by it can cause various unjustifiable effects. Taking the amount attached to her being a surrogate, it actually implies that her reproductive organ is treated in manner that of the usual commodity, which is actually justified by the amount entailed by hiring out her womb to the contracting parties of the surrogacy arrangement. This is also one of the primary reasons why surrogate motherhood is likened to prostitution. It is similar to prostitution in the sense that the body is being hired out, however, in the case of surrogacy the womb of the woman is the one that is actually being hired out and she is obliged to come out with a healthy outcome, a healthy child.

Furthermore, surrogate mothers may also be regarded as a project that is subject for bidding, wherein the surrogates are actually hired out by the highest bidders. Although there have been laws and existing public policies that were created and established to minimize or control the occurrence and or prevalence of such, still one can not refute the fact that surrogacy is actually baby selling and or offering a womb for rent by nature (Jones, 2002 & Burr J., 2000) & (O'Neill) Other unjustifiable aspects of surrogate arrangements would include the obligation of the surrogate to be able to produce an offspring that is in good health or superior in quality. Once the offspring has been delivered with an abnormality, chances are the surrogate would only get a partial amount for the services she has rendered to the contracting parties. The same goes with those whose pregnancy has been subjected to miscarriage.

This becomes unjust in the part of the surrogate since it is not her intention to deliver a child with abnormality and she cannot predict the possibility of a miscarriage (Gale, 1997). Another way of looking at surrogacy, as an immoral and unjustifiable act, is by way exploring the issue from the economic perspective. Based on observations made, those who usually agree to become surrogates are those who are not that financially stable. Since this is the case, agreeing to be used as a medium to make procreation possible for infertile couples, would naturally entail a cost because there is no such thing as free lunch. Of course, the surrogate would explore the options or opportunities given to her in order to get the highest return for the service that she will be providing. This is immoral since it inculcates in the surrogate wrong values and wrong perception of things.

This again degrades the dignity of human procreation and respect for the dignity of human sexuality. The surrogates are treated merely as objects. Likewise, in the case of the contracting parties, they are given the opportunity to choose the available possible surrogates. Of course, similar to that of the buyers of the business industry they would want to have a surrogate that would give them the highest quality and or utility in terms of offspring. Surrogacy actually caters to the possibility of a market for surrogacy, which is said to be supposedly being minimized and or controlled by existing laws and public policies (O'Neill, 1994). Is this the proper way of treating human beings particularly those who are under privileged?

This action actually violation of one of the major social principles to wit: common good. With surrogacy, the surrogates are not being aided to attain their fullest development as an individual; rather they are being coerced to engage themselves into something that could actually damage them. Likewise, the others take advantage of the surrogates' financial instability, which is again another deviation from ethical norms (Business Ethics, 2004 & Gomez, 1999). In terms of the physical and psychological aspect of the issue, I believe that surrogacy can also be considered as intrinsically bad. Surrogacy can negatively affect both the surrogate and the child. However, it can not be refuted that the emphasis on the above-mentioned aspects are not like that of the ones cited earlier in this paper.

The surrogate can be negatively affected physically due to the high health risks attached to pregnancy, health risks such as miscarriage, complications, and or even worse, death. What is actually immoral with this is the thought that the surrogates are being placed at a high risk at the expense of other people's vested interest. On the other hand, surrogates become negatively affected psychologically once they develop an attachment to the fetus inside their womb. This would definitely bring her sleepless nights, a disturbed soul, depression and the like which is actually rooted to the fact stipulated in the agreement or contract which she signed prior her conception. This becomes unjustifiable due to the burden it entails to an individual. It reaps her of having a sound mind for the purpose of serving the vested interest of no other than the contracting parties.

In the case of the child, surrogacy may cause the child to develop confusion, depression, and other emotional problems of even nature if he / she finds out the truth regarding his / her being. Such can be regarded again as unjustifiable for the child since it reaps him off his peace of mind. The widespread use of surrogate motherhood and other reproductive technologies cater to the possibility of frequent occurrences of more social problems such as vast changes in demography, which entails rapid shifts in the male / female ratios, age of parents relative to their children, the possible decline of two parent family, and possible homogeneity of society as cited by Lawrence Hinman (2001) in his lecture on the ethical issues in reproductive technologies. Human reproduction is natural; money is a product of history. To view the former in terms of the latter, denies the essential quality of reproduction itself.

The existing laws and public policies regarding surrogacy and surrogate arrangements were created and established primarily for the purpose of justifying the end and existence of surrogate motherhood. However, the psychological and physical harms visited on surrogate mothers suggest that the moral arguments behind these laws must be reconsidered. The physical health perils and emotional psychological harms prove that whenever the surrogacy contract is present, the individuals involved are inherently at risk. A society that values surrogacy does not value the fundamental and natural aspects of human reproduction.

Bibliography

Burr J. "Repellent to proper ideas about the procreation of children': Procreation and motherhood in the legal and ethical treatment of the surrogate mother". Psychology, Evolution and Gender, 1 August 2000, vol.
2, no. 2, pp. 105-117 (13). Gomez, Raphael. What is Right and Wrong in Business? 2nd ed. Sinagtala Publisher, Inc. 1999.
Hinman, Lawrence. Lecture of the Ethical Issues in Reproductive Technologies. University of San Diego, 19 February 2001.
Jones, Bryn Williams. "Commercial Surrogacy and the Redefinition of Motherhood". The Journal of Philosophy, Science and Law. February 2002, vol.
2. Lecture Notes in Business Ethics. 2004 McDowell, Janet Dickey.
The Procreations Ethics Series: Surrogate Motherhood". The Journal of Lutheran Ethics. web lc a. procreation ethics surrogate motherhood. html " Neill, Terry (ed. ). Biomedical Ethics: Opposing Viewpoints. Green haven Press, Inc., San Diego CA, (c) 1994.
pp. 185-196. Ragone, Helen. 1994.
Chasing the blood tie: Surrogate mothers, adoptive mothers and fathers. American Ethnologist. Richardson, Herbert. On the Problem of Surrogate Parenthood: Analyzing the Baby M Case. 1987.
Squire, Susan. 'Whatever Happened to Baby M?' Redbook, January 1994.
Whitehead, Mary Beth, with Loretta Schwartz-Nobel. A Mother's Story: The Truth About the Baby M Case. New York: St. Martin's Press, 1989.
Surrogate Motherhood. web Surrogate Mothers. Types of Surrogacy. The Canadian Surrogacy Options, Inc. web Case of Baby M: 1988.
Women's Rights on Trial, 1st Ed., Gale, 1997, p.