Letters to the Editor
-
Sure it's her womb, but...
it's their marriage. She wouldn't make a decision to take a job across the country and move with or without him (if they have a stable and loving marriage). That's a huge decision. And this one to carry a child is even bigger.
Just as he is responsible to her, she is to him. At the time you marry, you choose to enter into a life together. That means joint decisions and the ever-annoying compromise. You just don't get to do everything you feel like doing, all the time. That's reality. And it's okay. What's more, the LW and her husband have three children. The LW's primary responsibility is to her own family. However noble the her intentions (and they are indeed admirable), jeopardizing her family would be plain irresponsible in the end.
I'd suggest she either convince her husband to go with her on this, or convince her sister to adopt and hold her hand through the process. I wish her all the luck in the world.
-
ADOPT
I think that I must be in the minority here, but why don't people in these situations think about adopting? Why? Why put yourself through the financial and emotional hardship that comes with these ridiculous attempts at creating "your own child."?????
I know that people won't like what I am about to say, but I feel that I should say it. When you are unable to have a child and you really want a family, after a reasonable amount of effort has been applied (I guess fertility drugs are okay), you should think about adopting. If you want a child so bad, then it should not be an issue of whether it came from you or not. There are thousands and thousands of babies and children out there who need parents. Why aren't you thinking of them?
I find surrogacy and all that comes with it utterly selfish. I can't believe that there is all this talk about wanting to have a child but only on the condition that the child is biologically theirs. Do the world a favor (and do your children and husband a BIG favor) and talk your sister into adoption. Tell her that the love of a child is the same, no matter who that child is. If all she can think about is her needs and her wants, then maybe she isn't cut out to be a parent.
-
From Personal Experience
I think the LW should not carry a child for her sister. But not just because of the husband. I was surprised that the LW did not mention any potential complications regarding the emotional attachment she is very likely to have to the child. I am sure she will be a very devoted aunt--because she is the mother. The LW wasn't specific, but even if it isn't the LW's egg, there will be an attachment. In my family, my younger sister carried a child for my older sister. The husbands were not opposed. Unfortunately, almost immediately after the child was born, my sisters began to have disagreements as to the level of involvement the sister who carried the child should have. She felt a bond. She wanted to be more than a devoted aunt. It absolutely destroyed the relationship between my sisters. They no longer speak, my one sister is not permitted to see the child and the whole experience was extremely destructive. Please consider adoption.
-
Random Thought
I've been having a discussion with my wife about something nothing at all like this - on the surface. I've been thinking about getting a motorcycle; she's concerned about my safety. Now, she hasn't said, "You can't do this," but her fears do have a certain bearing on my decision.
That's a toy. This is a child, with far more potentially greater risks (all of the standard surrogacy issues - death, wanting to keep the child) and a lot of health conerns as well. And yet, she seems less willing to consider her husbands thoughts than I have been. Bizarre.
Also, a final comment - this may have been an editing issue, but I noticed that nowhere in the letter does it say that the LW was asked to do this. Its something that, she says, she wants to do for her sister. Not that her sister is begging her to do. What if her sister really isn't in favor of this either? If she offers, how do you say no? How do you say yes? What a position to put her sister and her sister's husband into!
-
Independentlpaz -
For certain, you are 20 yrs. old or someone on their 5th marriage. "OOOOH! Jump in there! Follow your heart. Life is too short!"
My ass!!!
LW should respect her family and contemplate what this could cost them. She should remember what it feels like to be 8 or 12 yrs.old. Her kids are not going to see the enormity of her gift; they are only going to be miffed that they did not get to go sledding or swimming or whatever, because their "selfish" old aunt wants a baby. They will resent "losing" their mom for a time.
As for the arguments that this is her body, I am a feminist, but this is not about feminism. Hubby is not 'making' her carry his deformed fetus. This is about *their* family & his voice in that famly. I know this is a faulty analogy, but I would have a problem with my husband taking up anything for a year that would keep him from being 100% with us as a parent or spouse. Whether is was jungle survival training or becoming an Army reservist or climbing Mt. Everest, I would like the right to veto. No one member of a couple should be able to make a unilateral decision that upends the entire family.
-
If it was me.
Someone earlier mentioned "how would she feel if her husband were asked to sire a child for his sterile brother?"
I can't speak for the LW, I can only speak for me. And though my SO doesn't have any brothers, I would be completely A-OK with him doing that if he wanted to. While I love the idea of adopting, I know people are attached to the idea of having children genetically related to them, and that solves the problem handily.
We aren't talking about surrogacy where the child is going to be given away to a stranger later. This child will be a part of the family no matter what. I think this would be a terrific way of doing things, personally--the sister can be close enough to *participate* in the pregnancy, not just observe it happening from a distance. And LW will get to participate in the child's life, only without having to actually be the disciplinarian. (Only here can we give birth to a child and still get to be the Cool Aunt!)
I think that, despite the husband's objections, the idea that this could end the marriage is a little strong unless they've got other serious problems right now. It's a temporary situation. I don't, personally, want to be married to the sort of man who would leave over a few extra months of morning sickness. The fact that he doesn't think it's a good idea doesn't mean he's going to divorce her, it means he thinks the idea sucks. But then, he's never been the one carrying the kids. This sounds like the sort of objection that'll pass with time.
I don't think staying married is inherently difficult, to contradict the divorce lawyer. I think we're all told that it's too hard and so nobody tries anymore. Seriously, look what we're talking about. Divorced over an unagreed-upon pregnancy that won't actually result in a child they have to raise! A permanent solution to a ten-month problem. Isn't it ludicrous to think of it in that context? "I know this will be over with by next year, honey, and I've loved you for all these years, but I'm going to have to leave, now." Who would say that, really? Well, no, I know some men would. But how many of them would you really want to continue living with?
If your marriage is on such a brittle foundation that this seems like a really likely possibility, the problem isn't your ideas of surrogacy, it's your idea of marriage. On the other hand, from the LW's tone I don't get the idea that divorce is imminent, just that the husband will be upset if she chooses to do it. Involve the sister and her husband as a support system to take stress off LW's husband, and then let LW's husband have something special to take the edge off... a golf vacation or a new television or whatever thing *he's* been itching about for years that *she* didn't approve of. No, you can't fix everything with shiny toys, but I think a willingness to talk about what *he* wants to make up for doing what *she* wants would go a long way.