Men, would you let your wife be a surrogate mother?

caraiselite

i'm my own person. husband or not. he's not responsible for me, nor does he make decisions for me. this isn't the 1800s.

if i could give someone else a child, i would. i loved being pregnant.

Stephanie_Autry

Men, would you let your wife be a surrogate mother? Ladies, if you really wanted to be a surrogate mother for someone and your husband wouldn't let you, would you do it anyways? I am asking because I have a friend who is going through this and some of you usually gives great advice.

No, I would never do that it's like beyond the boundaries of marriage in my book. I think that if you wanted to be a surrogate mother, you should be single! It's disrespectful to your husband to do that. :indifferent:

staceface519

I hated being pregnant with my own kid...let alone someone elses.

THIS ^^^

for realzzzzz :laugh:

Pregnancy sucked. Babies suck, unless you can hand them to someone when they cry.

WOW. . ive never seen someone say babies sucked . . . thats a new one by me. . .

For the record, I love babies. I never said they sucked....only that pregnancy sucked. For me atleast.

it says right there after pregnancy sucks that babies suck unless u hand them to someone when they cry. lol. . . and i know pregnancy sucks. . i went through it too! .. had morning sickness everyday for the first 4 months. . .

devil_in_a_blue_dress

Let?? My husband doesn't "let" me do anything. He's not my parent.

THIS

But this dude was talking about an attack on masculinity not that long ago, so yeah.

pamelak5

That sounds like a dysfunctional relationship, if my husband didn't 'let' me do something, I would be gone, marriage is a partnership, it involves compromise, not commands. Thankfully I married someone who believes that too.
sounds like they need therapy.

Bingo. My husband and I don't "allow" each other to do things.

staceface519

I hated being pregnant with my own kid...let alone someone elses.

THIS ^^^

for realzzzzz :laugh:

Pregnancy sucked. Babies suck, unless you can hand them to someone when they cry.

WOW. . ive never seen someone say babies sucked . . . thats a new one by me. . .

I breastfed both of mine. Yes, they sucked! :laugh:

YOUR MY HERO!!! i never breastfed with my daughter. . . .

rocksyraeis

As a woman who can not carry children to term, surrogacy and adoption are my only options. I'd be happy with surrogacy, however, back to the OP's point, I would want the husband/SO to be on board because a woman's health can be effected by her "better half." He could be an @ss about it, stress her out, which would put stress on the baby, throw her down the stairs, etc. While yes, it's her body, she's united in marriage and he has the right to an opinion.

It is incredibly difficult for me to carry to full term myself on account of my uterus being a heart shape. My fiancee however was diagnosed with a rare form of CF which allows him to be able to have children at the chance of lightening striking so about 5-10%. invito greatly increases our chances it isnt against nature to use invitro in my opinion...if we all thought that way then operations to save people are against nature as well along with c-secs of babys in danger in utero as well as blood transfusions, kemotherapy, insulin for diabetics, appendectomys, ect.

If people think of it as against nature, isn't medicine in general against nature?

Thats exactly the point i was making doll :flowerforyou:

Lone_Wolf70

As a woman who can not carry children to term, surrogacy and adoption are my only options. I'd be happy with surrogacy, however, back to the OP's point, I would want the husband/SO to be on board because a woman's health can be effected by her "better half." He could be an @ss about it, stress her out, which would put stress on the baby, throw her down the stairs, etc. While yes, it's her body, she's united in marriage and he has the right to an opinion.

It is incredibly difficult for me to carry to full term myself on account of my uterus being a heart shape. My fiancee however was diagnosed with a rare form of CF which allows him to be able to have children at the chance of lightening striking so about 5-10%. invito greatly increases our chances it isnt against nature to use invitro in my opinion...if we all thought that way then operations to save people are against nature as well along with c-secs of babys in danger in utero as well as blood transfusions, kemotherapy, insulin for diabetics, appendectomys, ect.

If people think of it as against nature, isn't medicine in general against nature?

Thats exactly the point i was making doll :flowerforyou:

I think there is a big difference in the sense that medicine sustains life and in this case we are talking about creating life. There is certainly a slipperly slope and unavoidable ethical boundries that science can cross.

Again, sorry if anyone takes it the wrong way. Just my opinion.

mommamills

I was a surrogate, but my husband at the time was supportive. It was not MY child, I had IVF I was simply an "oven"

This is how I would do it, it couldnt be "my" child.

I had a really easy pregnancy and a great child birthing body haha
I would consider it a honor.

AGREED! no way I could part with my own child. but I could def help loved ones bring their own bundle of joy into the world...with the support of my husband, of course. I agree....to be considered would be an honor. But still a very tough decision.

daffodilsoup

That being said, no man "lets me" do anything with my body - I am an adult, and I make my own decisions regarding what happens in my uterus.

Sooooo...

Been married long?

Thank you.

I am sick of this 'my body crap".

I suppose it would be ok for a man to go impregnate another woman without your blessing then right... because it's his body?

Not married, but in a committed relationship. I'd discuss a decision like that with my boyfriend/husband, but ultimately it comes down to my decision. Hopefully children and big goals (i.e. surrogacy) would be something discussed by the couple before they decide to get married.

If being a surrogate is that important to a woman and her husband doesn't want to "allow" her, then ultimately the relationship is going to fail because the priorities aren't the same. It's not quite the same as a man impregnating another woman, but ultimately if he wanted to get a vasectomy, it should be his decision and no one else's.

jillica

Just saying - sounds like the surrogate issue is a symptom of a bigger problem with the couple. I would even bet that this isn't the first time one of them has made a BIG decision without caring what the other one thought. I agree with those who are recommending counseling!

phtbtmgrl

I hated being pregnant with my own kid...let alone someone elses.

Me too! Love my child, but I hated the pregnancy part.

fbmandy55

That being said, no man "lets me" do anything with my body - I am an adult, and I make my own decisions regarding what happens in my uterus.

Sooooo...

Been married long?

Thank you.

I am sick of this 'my body crap".

I suppose it would be ok for a man to go impregnate another woman without your blessing then right... because it's his body?

Not married, but in a committed relationship. I'd discuss a decision like that with my boyfriend/husband, but ultimately it comes down to my decision. Hopefully children and big goals (i.e. surrogacy) would be something discussed by the couple before they decide to get married.

If being a surrogate is that important to a woman and her husband doesn't want to "allow" her, then ultimately the relationship is going to fail because the priorities aren't the same. It's not quite the same as a man impregnating another woman, but ultimately if he wanted to get a vasectomy, it should be his decision and no one else's.

I agree to an extent. My only point is that in a good relationship, both should work toward an agreement. I find that often women hold a double standard to men where they use sex and there bodies against their husbands and think that's fine but when the men do it, they are the devil.

ubuntufav

Well, first of all no one "lets" or "doesn't let" me do ANYTHING. This is a situation that necessitates discussion, and would be a mutual decision based on that discusion, respect for one another, and any other criteria that we establish between ourselves.

I keep seeing this, I bet my left nut that you dont let your man do alot of things. Women take so offense to a man not so called letting her do things. No one should ever be controlling but in some things, its normal for a guy not let his women do things without permission such as sleeping with another man, buying a car, going on dates with another guy, take a job that relocates her, get an abortion, quit a job, put the house on the market, move, change your child's school, put down a family pet, and spend money on a high purchase item. Its a marriage and that requires communication and both parties making decisions as a team. A man is not controlling just because he doesn't want or tries to stop his woman from doing this. Im sorry women, if you want to do whatever you want then stay single.

In a marriage, you can not just do whatever you want and neither can the man. This affects him as well, yes it is your body but in a marriage, you share everything. I bet you wouldn't let him cut off his penis or sleep with another woman. Hey, he can play that card too, its his body. I know most dont like it but in a marriage, both do have to answer to the other. Personally for me, I think it is amazing that she wants to do this for someone who can not have kids but I do agree, her husband has to be on board as well. It does affect him in so many ways as well and also there can be complications with the pregnancy. Its always a risk.

rocksyraeis

I think there is a big difference in the sense that medicine sustains life and in this case we are talking about creating life. There is certainly a slipperly slope and unavoidable ethical boundries that science can cross.

Again, sorry if anyone takes it the wrong way. Just my opinion.

To create life is to sustain life...that being said its not "creating" life its helping to make a woman capability of sustaining a life easier the sperm and egg are not "created" they are taken from the parents and introduced in a way that almost prevents failure technically invitro is sustaining a womans ability to create life with which she was created to do.

Birth defects are against nature and birth defects sometimes prevent conception...so i guess what im trying to say is invitro is the correction of a defect...surrogacy would be against nature in this line of thinking i guess....-goes back to eating scones and sipping tea- ;p

DontStopB_Leakin

I hated being pregnant with my own kid...let alone someone elses.

THIS ^^^

for realzzzzz :laugh:

Pregnancy sucked. Babies suck, unless you can hand them to someone when they cry.

WOW. . ive never seen someone say babies sucked . . . thats a new one by me. . .

For the record, I love babies. I never said they sucked....only that pregnancy sucked. For me atleast.

it says right there after pregnancy sucks that babies suck unless u hand them to someone when they cry. lol. . . and i know pregnancy sucks. . i went through it too! .. had morning sickness everyday for the first 4 months. . .

Yes, but I didn't say that. I was the person she quoted.

Yayyyy for reading.

takingnameskickingbutt

To the gentleman who thinks IVF and invitro are unnatural, I would invite him to consider that 100 years ago condoms were thought of as unnatural and 60 years ago the pill was not regularly taken and not even legal. Since you only have three children and you're a "bull", I am sure methods to interfer with conception were used.

With that said, I think surrogacy should be discussed in a committed relationship. I also think it's a great option for women who can't have children naturally and happen to want their own biological children.

TXBelle1174

My husband had asked me if I would consider having more children. I am 37 and we have two kids already. I told him that due to my age and medical issues, I really didnt want to have more kids BUT that I wouldnt rule it out completely. I love my kids, I am just happy with two.
We found out that some very close friends (best man at our wedding and his wife) could not have children due to the fact that she had uterine cancer. They gave her a year to try and get pregnant and then told her she had to have a hysterectomy. They wanted kids so bad and they are such good people, I approached my husband and asked if he was ok with offering to be a surrogate for them. He was VERY upset by this proposal. He felt hurt that I would offer to have a child for them but yet not want another of our own. I felt like it was two TOTALLY different situations and that the two shouldnt be compared - his/her embryo, I am just a carrier vs. my own eggs/dna, etc and the lifelong commitment to another child.
As much as I wanted to help our dear friends, I could not overrule his feelings and do it anyway. He is my husband and this is a very PERSONAL thing to offer someone. Not to be taken lightly in the least. My husband is far more important than anything else with the exception of my own children so there is no way I would/could do it without his full blessing and support.

rhonniema

You were watching Family Guy last night weren't you?

daffodilsoup

That being said, no man "lets me" do anything with my body - I am an adult, and I make my own decisions regarding what happens in my uterus.

Sooooo...

Been married long?

Thank you.

I am sick of this 'my body crap".

I suppose it would be ok for a man to go impregnate another woman without your blessing then right... because it's his body?

Not married, but in a committed relationship. I'd discuss a decision like that with my boyfriend/husband, but ultimately it comes down to my decision. Hopefully children and big goals (i.e. surrogacy) would be something discussed by the couple before they decide to get married.

If being a surrogate is that important to a woman and her husband doesn't want to "allow" her, then ultimately the relationship is going to fail because the priorities aren't the same. It's not quite the same as a man impregnating another woman, but ultimately if he wanted to get a vasectomy, it should be his decision and no one else's.

I agree to an extent. My only point is that in a good relationship, both should work toward an agreement. I find that often women hold a double standard to men where they use sex and there bodies against their husbands and think that's fine but when the men do it, they are the devil.

I sincerely hope I didn't come off as this, that's not really what I meant by "it's my body". I mostly mean that if being a surrogate mother is a big decision, and ultimately if it's that important to a woman, it's not really in her husband's rights to tell her she's not "allowed" to. I absolutely agree in good communication, and wouldn't want someone to make that decision without bringing it up to me, but ultimately it's the choice of that particular person. Sorry for any confusion there.

As far as those comparing it to sex, my boyfriend is absolutely "allowed" to make the choice have sex with other women if that's what he chooses, but he just wouldn't be my boyfriend for much longer. However, I don't see surrogacy in the same light that I would see either myself or my boyfriend conceiving a child through traditional intercourse with someone else. I guess I view surrogacy as too much of a medical procedure to have emotion attached to it the way I might take a physical affair - I guess the closest thing I could compare it to is that I wouldn't stop my boyfriend from participating in sperm donation.