Thoughts?

Neither is wrong. It’s an all round sad situation

Imo the child has a good rate of survival with the surgery so I don’t understand why they would terminate! I wish them all well especially that little baby

Unless the baby had an extremely low chance of survival they should not of been able to demand a termination 🤷🏻‍♀️

I could be wrong and please correct me if I am, but isn't this the story about the bio parents wanting to terminate because the baby had tested positive for a genetic disorder? I vaguely remember seeing this a while ago

If anyone wants to do their research instead of blindly voting with no context - the surrogate’s name is McKenna West.

This is the risk that you take when you involve other people in building your family and when you become invovled in building someone else's family is all I can say.

I don’t know a lot about surrogacy, but the more I do hear and learn about it the more I am against it 🤔 this is an impossible situation.

Just done some reading, so the birth parents put a clause in the surrogacy contract that they could demand a termination if there was "any anomaly" with the fetus. They shouldn't be allowed to be parents at all, you don't get to demand a "perfect" baby. I thought the US had a no abortion law? So how can they demand this? If it had not been a surrogacy and the baby had the same treatable condition would they have been allowed an abortion then?
What if the child gets in an accident and is no longer "perfect" they going to demand they'd taken out back and shot??

I’m not sure if this is going to come off right because I feel like I’m having a hard time articulating it. But the more I think about it, I actually think they’re both wrong and entitled. I’m assuming the surrogate is pro life? And obviously the couple isn’t. I don’t think either of these parties should have put themselves in this situation.

She signed a contract. She should have gotten the abortion.

And just to add to this. I have a friend who was a surrogate in FL. She terminated the pregnancy because she was having medical complications. The IP’s refused to pay out her contract and she had to sue them. Anyways. These are just 2 cases that represent a much larger problem and why surrogacy should be illegal and is just another form of commodifying a human being.

She moved to Texas for their prolife laws after the couple wanted her to terminate the pregnancy, which is wrong IMO. Going out of her way to remove that option entirely (and opening the doors for Texas and other states to "protect" more pregnancies with anti-abortion laws and policies).

That being said, surrogates changing their minds is fairly common, it is still their body. This is something I think can be somewhat expected as a possibility when you're having a stranger carry your child for you.

I clicked the bio parents were in the wrong, because I feel like if they properly got to know & vetted the surrogate this would not have happened to them.

McKenna is clearly severely pro-life & I have no idea why she decided to agree with what was written in the contract, she seems weird and evil for doing such a thing tbh

but I still feel like the intended parents are more so at fault for allowing that woman to be involved in the gestation of their child if they had a clause about termination in their contract.

In general I’m not a fan of surrogacy happening, I think if it does happen the surrogate and the intended parents / bio parents should have had a long running personal relationship with the surrogate before they ever make an agreement, and that payments should basically just cover the cost of treatment, not profits for the surrogate.