It seems somewhat unseemly that the rich can pay the poor, or at least folks with less money, to bear their children. Not many female executives at Goldman Sachs are lining up for this 9-month job.
In respect to Lucas, he already has 3 adopted offspring.
And to posit an argument in support of surrogacy: hey DNA is important.
There are diseases and psychoses lurking in genetic make-up.
Also, a level of vanity exists. Who doesn’t want a child with their nose or hair or eyes?
Almost 30 years ago, near the town where this column was born, the tenuous bonds of surrogacy exploded. A wealthy and educated couple- with the wife suffering from some physical issues- entered into a contract with a young woman. She, the surrogate, was to be inseminated with the husband’s sperm and bear the pregnancy and then bear child. Finally, she agreed to surrender the baby.
It was notarized and everything.
Once the infant arrived, the birth mother sued for custody. The newborn was called, in the ongoing proceedings, Baby M. It was a legal battle and a class war. Some smirked that Mrs. Stern, half of the couple seeking a surrogate, should have soldiered on through a pregnancy unconcerned about any physical issues or ramifications.
Ultimately, the Sterns won the suit, were awarded the child and raised her.
That was in 1996. It was uncomfortable to formulate legal terms about children and parentage. But the practice remains.
Both Fallon and Lucas appear to have escaped having the birth mother trying to keep the new additions to their households. Maybe the contracts are tighter today.
Just like the future kings of England had whipping boys to take their punishment, do we need women to breed for others?
Especially when there are so many children in this country and world, desperate for a home.