Surrogate Mothers

[burns052700]

I was wondering if anyone could lead me in the right direction on being a surrogate mother. My SIL is seriously think of doing this (3 times to be exact for the money). Please help.

Edited June 18, 2008 by burns052700

[ruthiechan]

I only have second hand experience.

A friend in Vegas was one. The mother-to-be was horribly paranoid all the time about her health and what she was doing and eating, to the point, at least to my friend, of insanity. My friend got to the point where she started feeling like it was her child simply because the baby was growing in her. It ended badly. My friend felt bitter at the end and she was estranged from the lady she was carrying for. My husband said that such is common.

[cleobird]

I'm a 2x gestational surrogate mother.

I have only had good (wonderful actually) experiences that ended joyously.

If your sister is thinking of doing this "for the money" she has another thing coming. Becoming a surrogate mother is so much more than a "job". It is a huge emotional and physical commitment.

There are shots (daily) involved.

There are emotional issues (some, like me, are not emotionally attached to the baby but others are)

There are risks of multiples (I had twins last time)

And some journeys end badly (like previous poster mentioned)

All in all, it is a wonderful gift for a family who is having trouble carrying their own child.

What is a Gestational Surrogate Mother?

This is a webpage I put together with resources and information about becoming a surrogate. Yes, there is money involved, but it absolutely CANNOT be the motivating force for a woman to do this.

Hope this helps!

[Gwen]

i think within the chruch it's discouraged. the bishop can look it up in the church handbook of instruction and discuss it with you if you are interested.

as for me i hate being pregnant so much that i wouldn't consider it unless it was for my sis or brother or something like that, pure love and the greatest gift one could give motive. you couldn't pay me enough otherwise.

[NeuroTypical]

I was wondering if anyone could lead me in the right direction on being a surrogate mother.

I point you towards your Bishop. Gwen is right - the practice is strongly discouraged.

LM

[ruthiechan]

I point you towards your Bishop. Gwen is right - the practice is strongly discouraged.

LM

It is? I've never heard that before. Why is that?

[Fiannan]

I point you towards your Bishop. Gwen is right - the practice is strongly discouraged.

LM

Unless, of course, your bishop is a fertility specialist -- then he might be able to point out some database for couples desiring such services.

As to the issue of surrogacy, sperm donation and egg donation all I have to say is that if you tell your bishop you donate there is nothing I know of that could allow him to deny you a temple recommend. As for surrogacy, to each their own. I recently read an article about an Indian fertility specialist who links up infertile couples in places like England with women in the village that will become surrogates. They demand less money than western women I would assume.

Talk about outsourcing!

As for people who are intelligent and genetically healthy (and interested in sperm or egg donation) one can do a quick search on the internet for locations that may be close to where you live.

[Gwen]

i don't think anyone said that it was a sin, or that you would loose your temple recomend over it. doesn't mean it can't be "strongly discouraged".

in my opinion if the chruch is strongly discouraging something then one should consider it a matter of serious prayer and fasting. it's discouraged for a reason. you may be the exception to the rule so to speak but personally i like to know that from the lord before i just say "well, it's not a sin, they can't stop me from going to the temple so i'll do as i please; i don't care what they think"

as for why it's discouraged (my thoughts and opinion) you hear all the horrior stories of the birth mother not being able to seperate from the pregnancy and thinking she has rights to the baby later, the birth parents thinking it means they can dictate every breath the birth mother takes, etc. it can get messy. could hurt a lot of ppl rather than help them.

another difficult issue could do with the covenant. if i'm married in the covanant and my sis is as well and i carry a child for her, made of her and her husbands dna, whos covenant does the child fall under? it's thier genitic child, it's theirs leagely, but i am the one that "gave birth". just sounds confusing to me. on the very same note i think, how could such a beautiful gift be seen as any worse than in the scripture days when if a man died without child his brother or father would marry and reproduce with the widow and have children "for" the dead husband. the children were considered to be his in "covenant" and in this life. or when wifes who couldn't have kids would give their handmaden to the husband to have children with, the wife was considered the mother, not the handmaiden. to me the medical technology progression that allows one to give such a beautiful gift without actually having to marry and have intimate relations with others is a wonderful thing.

so though i'm not sure i know exactly why or agree with the fact that it's strongly discouraged, if i found myself in the situation i would definately take it to the lord and consider the chruch's standpoint with all seriousness. but then what is the reality that most of us will ever find ourselves in the situation unless we go looking for it?

[Hemidakota]

I point you towards your Bishop. Gwen is right - the practice is strongly discouraged.

LM

Concur. Have the Bishop turned to PG188 in the Church Handbook for church response regarding this issue.

[NeuroTypical]

Unless, of course, your bishop is a fertility specialist -- then he might be able to point out some database for couples desiring such services.

It seems like if he did so, he'd be going against the general handbook.

Fiannan, did you just bring this Bishop out of your imagination, or do you actually know of one?

LM

[Aphrodite]

I don't see why the church would discourage it seeing how keen they are for us all to breed like rabbits. Some things are personal, and 'the church' cant have a stand on everything in your life. Its a very personal decision. I personally would only do it for my sister if she ever wanted me to, and only after I'd had a child of my own.

[Fiannan]

It seems like if he did so, he'd be going against the general handbook.

Fiannan, did you just bring this Bishop out of your imagination, or do you actually know of one?

LM

Since when was the GH cannonized as scripture????

[Hemidakota]

That is the same as to say, "Since when are conference talks canonized scripture." Though, food for thought, it was the Pagans and apostates that canonized the bible. The other 5000 scrolls were not included but discarded for various reasons by the Roman church.

Yes, it is a guidance and requires spirit of wisdom for General Authorities, Mission Presidents, Regional Presidents, Stake Presidents, Bishops, and branch Presidents,

[Fiannan]

Like I said in a previous thread, there was a Mormon fertility doctor who used his own sperm for his patients rather than using ordered donor material. He fathered at least 70 kids that way. From my understanding the local LDS Church community was totally there to support him and defend him when all this came out.

A Mormon businessman in Australia a few years back was making a strong appeal for people to follow his example and donate -- there are shortages of donors in many countries (not the USA though as the US companies involved in egg and sperm donation pay the donors money).

I see nothing really morally wrong with this -- expecially since (I have read) that prospective donor recipients are screened as well to try to find if there are any reasons they should not be helped to become a parent.

[NeuroTypical]

Fiannan, did you just bring this Bishop out of your imagination, or do you actually know of one?

Since when was the GH cannonized as scripture????

I'll take that as a "I just made him up."

LM

[Fiannan]

I'll take that as a "I just made him up."

LM

Uh, did you read my thread? I used the term in a hypothetical sense. Go back and re-read it if you wish.

[KateBateBoBate]

That is the same as to say, "Since when are conference talks canonized scripture."

No, it's not the same because conference talks ARE scripture. Okay, not canon, but they are considered the most recent scripture we have. Learned that in Institute Class on The Living Prophets.

So, I found this thread because I'm searching for info on surrogacy in the church because I already offered my uterus to my dear friend who is not a member of our church and she has two children, wanted another, had a miscarriage fairly late in the pregnancy and then had a stillborn baby VERY late in the pregnancy and then had another miscarriage.

The day she told me her baby had died I knew I would carry a baby for her if she asked me to. I'd do almost anything for her. I won't share my genes because I know I'd see that baby as mine, but I'd totally be able to carry a baby not of my genes and not get attached to it. I have kids already and am not having more, don't want more and hate being pregnant. I hate it SO much that my instinctual reaction when I hear someone is pregnant is "Oh, I'm so sorry for her." Then, I realize it's a good thing and am happy but... that's how much I hate being pregnant.

Nevertheless, I've already offered my uterus and meant it 100%. There's no acceptance as of yet.

But I wanted to find out what the church says about it. If the church just discourages it and it's not a sin, going to put my recommend in jeopardy, why the heck would I not do this for her? Think about it. IT WON'T NEGATIVELY AFFECT MY SALVATION. What else do I need to know?

It might be miserable to be pregnant? Who cares? You know what's more miserable? Giving birth to your dead baby. And not knowing anything about the plan of salvation to make that even a teeny bit bearable.

It might tear us apart and estrange us? (It won't but for the sake of argument...) So what? I can give up my friendship, if necessary, to bring a family joy and peace. And who knows, it might even soften their hearts enough to pray about the church.

I can't think of any GOOD reason why I'd be discouraged from doing this that doesn't involve fear of some pretty minor inconveniences, when you look at the situation in perspective.

And of course I'd NEVER want money. I'd be okay with her buying me a few maternity threads but THAT'S IT. Okay, and maybe vitamins.

And if she wanted to micromanage my diet (which she'd never do because she isn't stupid and she knows you can eat almost nothing and still have a healthy baby), WHATEVER MAKES HER HAPPY. How dare I complain when I have never given birth to a dead baby?

These are all SMALL THINGS.

What is not small is the excruciating pain my friend has been going through. And I love her and can't think of a single judgemental thing to say about her.

So, bottomline: if it won't keep me out of the C.T., I'm going to use my free agency. I feel completely good about it.

But if anyone knows of any statement saying it WILL keep me out, please let me know. (Of course, I'll make an appt. with my Stake Pres. but in the meantime...)

Thanks.

[KateBateBoBate]

By the way, to be clear, it never occurred to me til now that there might be some negative stance on it. And even if the church does say no (the Lord says no), I feel this is not something you can say and take back!

[KateBateBoBate]

i don't think anyone said that it was a sin, or that you would loose your temple recomend over it. doesn't mean it can't be "strongly discouraged".

in my opinion if the chruch is strongly discouraging something then one should consider it a matter of serious prayer and fasting. it's discouraged for a reason. you may be the exception to the rule so to speak but personally i like to know that from the lord before i just say "well, it's not a sin, they can't stop me from going to the temple so i'll do as i please; i don't care what they think"

another difficult issue could do with the covenant. if i'm married in the covanant and my sis is as well and i carry a child for her, made of her and her husbands dna, whos covenant does the child fall under? it's thier genitic child, it's theirs leagely, but i am the one that "gave birth". just sounds confusing to me. on the very same note i think, how could such a beautiful gift be seen as any worse than in the scripture days when if a man died without child his brother or father would marry and reproduce with the widow and have children "for" the dead husband. the children were considered to be his in "covenant" and in this life. or when wifes who couldn't have kids would give their handmaden to the husband to have children with, the wife was considered the mother, not the handmaiden. to me the medical technology progression that allows one to give such a beautiful gift without actually having to marry and have intimate relations with others is a wonderful thing.

First, I've already responded generally, to the whole thread, but I wanted to respond to this.

First of all, call me crazy but if something is not a sin and only "strongly discouraged", I feel pretty comfortable with making my own decisions. I dare say, even, that I feel comfortable with getting into the celestial kingdom by the skin of my teeth. As long as I get there, what difference does it make? I have all of eternity to become perfect. So Jane never took a swig of diet coke in her life while I drink it regularly. So what? If we're both worthy to enter the same place, I don't see how that matters. Obviously, I don't mean that I'm looking to do whatever bad things I can get away with, because that would signify a whole attitude of not looking to become like Christ.

What I mean is that I know my heart. And I feel comfortable with making decisions that are generally discouraged, even "strongly", for reasons that are totally Christlike. And if I'm wrong by a technicality but I still make it to the same place as you, I'm okay with that strike on my record.

The reason, I think, why some things are only discouraged and not commandments is because they can negatively affect our lives here on Earth. And the Lord loves us enough that he wants to let us know. But they don't affect our salvation.

And heck, in the W.O.W, it says to eat meat sparingly but how many members do you know who do that? I'm one of few in my church. I know plenty of members who are obese and treat their bodies like crap. Is that going to keep them out of the celestial kingdom? We're told "no". If they want to be obese and possibly miserable because of that on Earth, that's their choice.

As for your comment about being confused about the covenant, I think the whole birthing thing is just wording. It has to be. Look at all the other things that we do that are totally confusing as far as who gets sealed to whom. Women who've been sealed to their husband and had kids with him get widowed, marry again and have more kids. Well, THAT'S confusing. And yet the church definitely doesn't discourage those people from having more kids. Because the important thing is that they're good people wanting to have kids and the Lord works it out somehow later.

Maybe if my friends never joined the church, that child WOULD get sealed to me. I doubt it, but I'm sure it would be fine. I don't think there's a whole lot of "I hate you and wouldn't want to be sealed to you" in the celestial kingdom.

But I think the more likely scenario is that it's their child, with their genes and it just lived in me for a while. And the Lord will make sense of this, just like he will make sense of all those frozen embryos that will be frozen until Christ comes. Just like he makes sense of all the kids that are born thanks to good old fashioned sperm banks.

[Moksha]

... seeing how keen they are for us all to breed like rabbits.

They tend to say it differently however. More like orchard talk of being fruitful.

[KateBateBoBate]

They tend to say it differently however. More like orchard talk of being fruitful.

Come on, are you saying that "breed like rabbits" is not, like, flattering or something? ;-) They're so cute! And I think they even prefer their carrots with Jello and marshmellows, too!

[hordak]

Not to stir stuff up but i never understood the general acceptance Christians have for fertility science but the bitterness towards abortion. In my understanding they make up around 10 embryos to increase the odds of 1 taking knowing most are just going to be trash. So if a women discarding 1 embryo for her own selfish reasons is wrong why would discarding 8 or 9 be ok? What is the churches stance?

Back to the subject at hand. Has you SIL ever been pregnant? I cant imaging that is something one would want to do for money.

[Fiannan]

Not to stir stuff up but i never understood the general acceptance Christians have for fertility science but the bitterness towards abortion. In my understanding they make up around 10 embryos to increase the odds of 1 taking knowing most are just going to be trash. So if a women discarding 1 embryo for her own selfish reasons is wrong why would discarding 8 or 9 be ok? What is the churches stance?

Back to the subject at hand. Has you SIL ever been pregnant? I cant imaging that is something one would want to do for money.

Not sure on that one. From my understanding unless implantation has taken place then you have not commited abortion. If that did constitute abortion then, from what I have heard, any woman on several types of birth control pills would be doing a homemade abortion every month that her egg got fertilized but was not allowed to implant.

[Hemidakota]

No, it's not the same because conference talks ARE scripture. Okay, not canon, but they are considered the most recent scripture we have. Learned that in Institute Class on The Living Prophets.

So, I found this thread because I'm searching for info on surrogacy in the church because I already offered my uterus to my dear friend who is not a member of our church and she has two children, wanted another, had a miscarriage fairly late in the pregnancy and then had a stillborn baby VERY late in the pregnancy and then had another miscarriage.

The day she told me her baby had died I knew I would carry a baby for her if she asked me to. I'd do almost anything for her. I won't share my genes because I know I'd see that baby as mine, but I'd totally be able to carry a baby not of my genes and not get attached to it. I have kids already and am not having more, don't want more and hate being pregnant. I hate it SO much that my instinctual reaction when I hear someone is pregnant is "Oh, I'm so sorry for her." Then, I realize it's a good thing and am happy but... that's how much I hate being pregnant.

Nevertheless, I've already offered my uterus and meant it 100%. There's no acceptance as of yet.

But I wanted to find out what the church says about it. If the church just discourages it and it's not a sin, going to put my recommend in jeopardy, why the heck would I not do this for her? Think about it. IT WON'T NEGATIVELY AFFECT MY SALVATION. What else do I need to know?

It might be miserable to be pregnant? Who cares? You know what's more miserable? Giving birth to your dead baby. And not knowing anything about the plan of salvation to make that even a teeny bit bearable.

It might tear us apart and estrange us? (It won't but for the sake of argument...) So what? I can give up my friendship, if necessary, to bring a family joy and peace. And who knows, it might even soften their hearts enough to pray about the church.

I can't think of any GOOD reason why I'd be discouraged from doing this that doesn't involve fear of some pretty minor inconveniences, when you look at the situation in perspective.

And of course I'd NEVER want money. I'd be okay with her buying me a few maternity threads but THAT'S IT. Okay, and maybe vitamins.

And if she wanted to micromanage my diet (which she'd never do because she isn't stupid and she knows you can eat almost nothing and still have a healthy baby), WHATEVER MAKES HER HAPPY. How dare I complain when I have never given birth to a dead baby?

These are all SMALL THINGS.

What is not small is the excruciating pain my friend has been going through. And I love her and can't think of a single judgemental thing to say about her.

So, bottomline: if it won't keep me out of the C.T., I'm going to use my free agency. I feel completely good about it.

But if anyone knows of any statement saying it WILL keep me out, please let me know. (Of course, I'll make an appt. with my Stake Pres. but in the meantime...)

Thanks.

Sister, anything that is spoken by the Holy Spirit is scripture. Yes, you can use your free agency but again, choose wisely.

Your friend

[hordak]

Not sure on that one. From my understanding unless implantation has taken place then you have not commited abortion. If that did constitute abortion then, from what I have heard, any woman on several types of birth control pills would be doing a homemade abortion every month that her egg got fertilized but was not allowed to implant.

I guess that is one way to look at it. I would have to say there is a difference's between a women who uses the pill or the IUD to prevent implantation IF fertilization occurs and one who pays to fertilize many egg knowing most will go to waste.IMO.

But i see how that covers the bases so to speak.