How about rental?
Parents that provide infants for photo shoots, movie work, etc. How is that defended?
If anyone thinks that allowing a woman to sell her baby will lead to poorer infertile couples being able to get a child, they need to take a crash course in economics. In some cases the baby will in all likelihood go to the highest bidder, even if said person is a convicted peophile running a child brothel!
The surrogate arrangement gave a clear cut fee of $10,000 plus expenses to the surrogate mother. In the above Baby M case, Bill Stern was earning $12K more than Mary Beth Whitehead husband’s Richard ($42K vs. $30K). I had to laugh at it being portrayed as a battle between the rich and the poor.
By poor I meant a couple who can’t afford the 30K estimated fee quoted in a previous post. I didn’t mean poor as in living in a homeless shelter.
Current market data indicates that the price floor on babies is in the neighborhood of $1000 cash and 16% of a 2000 Dodge Intrepid.
Many adoption agencies charge on a sliding scale. Children’s Home Society of Minnesota, for instance, is a non-profit agency, and the one thru which we adopted both my kidlets.
The process is rather different than shopping, for whatever that is worth.
Regards,
Shodan
The thing that always gets me about this is the fact that any two people who are smart enough to have sex and get pregnant can have a child. They can smoke in the home, live in squalor, and pretty much get away with whatever they want, as long as the two people stay together. The child could be abused sexually, physically, and emotionally, and as long as the two happy parents keep quiet, nothing will ever come of it.
But when divorce comes into play, or adoption, then Child Protective Services goes into full gear and anyone wanting to adopt or have custody of a child must pass a strenuous background check, pay large sums of money, get their home inspected, to the point that a person would have to be almost like Christ himself to qualify to adopt a child.
While I don’t think CPS should just give a kid away with the purchase of a taco, they should be a little more grateful that there are nice people wanting to take care of kids.
It’s the same way with dogs, even! I was at the Humane Society yesterday, and to “adopt” a dog, I have to pay $145. WTF, there? If nobody adopts the dog, he is going to get a lethal injection anyways.
It would be like me charging someone for picking through my garbage…
How do you know the purchaser is not going to mistreat the child?
Is some woman who prefers money to their own child going to do a background check?
I have to say, a lot of the responses to the OP are totally off topic. He’s not asking why people get pregnant, what is foster care, whether or who should do background checks on adopters, how must an adoption costs via an agency, etc. He’s just asking “Why exactly is selling your newborn illegal / a bad thing?” So can people get back on topic?
Personally, I think people don’t want to admit it’s just taboo.
A human being is not a commodity to be bought or sold. People are held liable for the care, or lack thereof, that they submit their children to. It is illegal to harm or kill a child. If you sell a child you have just devalued their meaning to be the equivalent of a toaster or a car. You think puppy mills are awful? Dogs popping out litter after litter of puppies just so someone can buy a dog? What would prevent some disreputable country from creating baby mills? Or having those babies used for donor organs or medical experiments?
If a woman gets pregnant there are legal options available. She can have an abortion; she can get with an adoption attorney to find out about arranging a private adoption where she can choose the adoptive parents. She can contact the department of children and family services who will take the baby from the hospital immediately after birth or even after she has brought the baby home and suddenly realizes that she is overwhelmed by the responsibility and expense. In some states she can even take to baby to a church, hospital or fire station and leave it there, no questions asked. But at no time should the idea of making a profit off of your child be considered an option.
I believe that a child’s life is invaluable.
I think those responses are useful and on-topic, because they try to define which aspect of selling a newborn is immoral/illegal.
In the US at least, it’s legal to compensate someone for donating an egg for IVF, so basically, you can buy an egg. And IIRC, it’s also possible to get someone else’s fertilized egg (embryo) for IVF as well. So would it be possible to buy an embryo, and also employ someone to be the surrogate mother?
I personally think it would be wrong if the woman was apporached by someone she never met on the way to give birth and agreed to give them the baby for money. A good friend, friend of a friend, something like that, I don’t see why that is not legal.
As **jtgain ** pointed out, anybody anywhere can have a kid and do whatever the hell they want to it- beat it, rape it, whatever, just as if you get a kid from someone you can do whatever the hell you want with it. It’s not like child living with birth parent guarantees safety and well being. Someone buying a child can use it in a child sex ring, same as a birth parent can.
Here’s the scenario. Assume in all cases that the adopters have been background-checked and would be perfect parents. Also assume they are willing and able to pay to have a child. Also, assume the woman becoming pregnant is healthy and of sound mind.
- A woman decides she wants to sell her fertilized egg. She then becomes pregnant and gives the egg to the adopters in exchange for money. The adopters implant it in one of them and go on to bear the child.
- A woman decides she wants to bear a child for someone. She then becomes pregnant and gives the child to the adopters in exchange for money.
- A woman decides to bear a child for someone. She then becomes pregnant, bears the child, gives the child to an agency. The agency gives the child to the adopters in exchange for money.
4a-b-c) A woman becomes pregnant accidentally. She then either gives away the fertilized egg, or gives the child to the adopters or to an agency as in scenarios 1-2-3.
I don’t see much difference morally between any of these.
And personally, I also consider a child’s life invaluable. I don’t think any of these scenarios makes the child any less valuable or more valuable. In all scenarios the adopters really want a child and the woman either wants to help them or cannot raise the child herself.
-
A pregnant woman decides to “sell” her child. She goes on line and asks several couples what they are willing to pay for it. The winning couple offers $70,000. After taking the money and giving them the child, the woman changes her mind and goes to court to get the child back. She then does not pay the money back, and the couple don’t have a legal case.
-
The woman agrees to have the child and uses the husband’s sperm, but it is born deformed and the couple only wants a perfect child. What then?
-
The couple uses the husband’s sperm, but wants a male/female child only, The tests reveal the woman is carrying a child of the “wrong” sex. The couple wants the woman to have an abortion and try again. What then?
-
The couple wants one child and uses the husband’s sperm. It is later found out the woman is carrying triplets. What then?
How do we know a biological parent won’t mistreat his/her biological child? We generally don’t make biological parenting contingent on home visits, financial statements, etc.
If you sell a child, that says you don’t want it. I would think there’s a better chance of birth mother abusing a child she doesn’t want then there is a person who spends thousands to by it, excluding Rosemary’s Baby types.
Let’s say that selling babies becomes legal. What happens when there is a racial disparity in prices? What if a white baby brings $15k, but a black baby brings $5k?
Does the Justice Department need to step in and regulate prices?
The OP said:
I was challenging this assumption.
Because you don’t know if your good friend or friend of a friend is a child abuser.
Sadly they can.
Fortunately giving birth usually inspires parental love.
I think most posters here are uneasy both about someone who would give up their child, and someone who would buy one for money.
There are plenty of posters who have paid 10s of thousands of dollars to adopt their kids, and there are probably plenty who have given kids up for adoption. Heck, I’d be a surrogate in a heartbeat, if I could. And some days, I’d sell my kids for a nickel, if anyone would take them.
If I had been unable to have children, adoption would have been my choice. I’m grateful to the folks who have adopted children, so those kids have decent homes. “Poor” people should have that option, also, I believe, because being “poor” doesn’t equal “bad parent.” Some of the best parents I know are poor, and their kids are thriving.
I don’t see it as “selling” a baby, but a woman in poverty giving a better life to herself and the child. Birth mother gets $X, and baby gets a stable family environment. Pregnancy and childbirth aren’t easy or cheap, nor is child-rearing. Nothing immoral or unethical about either one.
How many women in poverty would be pressured into selling their newborns. “Well, you know this rich couple will give the child a better home than you ever could. Don’t you want money to finish your education?” The poor mother, in a post-partum daze, agrees to it.
There was a good Catholic girl who got herself pregnant. She was pressured into giving the child to an attorney who promised he would find the baby a good home. She gave birth to a baby girl and handed her over. Here is the rest of the story.