Becoming A Father Through Surrogacy

Many men are opting for parenthood through surrogacy. I am not talking of those women who cannot conceive but men who do not want to marry but want to be a parent to a child.

We here of celebrity fathers here in India.

What are your thoughts on this? Can a child be brought up without a mother?

 

Why not? If given enough love, care and taught about general stuff like life itself, manners, people, and what not, either mothers or fathers who are raising their child on their own could raise a ways better individual than parents who are raising a kid together.

The issue behind this is that people too often think that kids need both parents for a kid to live nicely, even worse, too many people think that you won't raise a kid properly without mother and father in his life. Look how many spoiled brats are out there and they both parents.

I believe that kids that are raised by 1 parent (if the parenting is done right, ofcourse) will most likely be a better individual than most kids raised in family with both parents.

I bet that even the statistics could prove the same. I know more than few individuals who were raised by 1 parent and the turned out to be better than most other people I know.

 

The history of the human race has shown that the best environment for childhood development is a stable, low stress household that has both the biological mother and father. Can children be raised in other structures successfully? Of course, however, we are talking about what is the best for the child.

The noted sociologist Dr. Paul Amato, Ph.d in Behavioral Sciences, in a research study published jointly by the Brookings Institute and Princeton, writes:

"Specifically, compared with children who grow up in stable, two-parent families, children born outside marriage reach adulthood with less education, earn less income, have lower occupational status, are more likely to be idle (that is, not employed and not in school), are more likely to have a non-marital birth (among daughters), have more troubled marriages, experience higher rates of divorce, and report more symptoms of depression… Research clearly demonstrates that children growing up with two continuously married parents are less likely than other children to experience a wide range of cognitive, emotional, and social problems, not only during childhood, but also in adulthood."​

Dr. Sara McLanahan, Ph.d in Sociology, currently with Princeton University, writes:

"If we were asked to design a system for making sure that children’s basic needs were met, we would probably come up with something quite similar to the two-parent family ideal. Such a design, in theory, would not only ensure that children had access to the time and money of two adults, it would provide a system of checks and balances that promote quality parenting. The fact that both adults have a biological connection to the child would increase the likelihood that the parents would identify with the child and be willing to sacrifice for that child and it would reduce the likelihood that either parent would abuse the child." ​

Child Trends, the nonprofit, nonpartisan, research center that studies all stages of child development once published:

"An extensive body of research tells us that children do best when they grow up with both biological parents in a low-conflict marriage… Thus, it is not simply the presence of two parents, as some have assumed, but the presence of two biological parents that seem to support child development."
​

Even ignoring modern research on the topic, it is the family model that has withstood the test of time. For millennia, strong societies were built upon strong communities, which were, in turn, built upon strong families. It works, despite what some snivelers would have you believe.

I suppose parenthood through surrogacy could work for some. But why not try the old fashioned method of finding an intelligent, strong, caring woman, then settle down, have some kiddos, take care of them, love the heck out of them, and enjoy the good life? Works for me. And tens of millions of other men, past and present.

 

Well, I agree to some of said things, but since we are evolving, our society is changing, maybe family "ideology" would change as well.

I would personally still go for normal family, meaning having both mother and father involved, but there are many great parents who are doing more for their kid than some families are.

Sure, this can be discussed and viewed from many different angles, but what matters the most is the kid, who raises him and how he raises him.

Lets try to ignore surrogacy over here. Lets say that you are a male, in your 30's and you want a child. You could easily adopt one of the poor kiddos living in the orphanage and give him a nice and loving home, without having a partner. It is different than surrogacy itself, but still, it proves a certain point.

If you work hard and give enough love to your kid, you can raise a brilliant young fella without a partner. The only thing here is that most people find it unusual and the idea of being a single parent seems bad to most. But it really isn't.

 

To some extent what you say seems the case as there are so many divorces which result in either a father or mother who gets the custody of the children. In this case it is slightly different in that the child is weaned away the moment it is born and the baby is not breast fed.

 

What prompted me to write this post is when there was news about a celebrity that had produced a baby with this method Educated people surely know the ramifications of a child not having a mother. I therefore fail to understand why they go in for such an arrangement unless the person concerned is a gay.

 

Because every person should have a chance to raise a kid perhaps? Some couples might go for it as well if your mate in life is infertile. Sure, breast milk is what babies need, but it isn't necessary. Many kids who have been raised this way are quite healthy and capable. Its not surrogacy that might be the problem, its the potential parent who might not do the right thing.

 

I think differently. Every person is born to do something they are destined to and bringing up a kid may not be in their destiny. Their hands are free to do perhaps greater things for the world. Society sets norms without consulting anyone

 

I beg to differ. What does the destiny have to do with this? If a woman agrees to carry a child for someone, it is her own choice. Destiny has nothing to do. Any if you really want to involve destiny in this case, maybe part of her destiny did involve her carrying a child for someone else.

And if you are aiming at the children brought to the world by this method, what does that change. It changes nothing. Just because the child was carried by another woman does not mean it wont do something great.

I think you might be bringing morals and religion on this.

Surrogacy is a choice for both sides. It can be done for money, it can be done out of your free will to help someone who might have problems with infertility.

I see no reason to judge anyone on this. That mother will give a birth to the kid like any other mother out there. You are not growing those children in tubes.

 

No religion and no morals. I only said that we are here for a particular purpose and that may not include bringing up children. Bending backwards for that therefore may not be necessary. This surrogacy thing has just about made its presence. What did the earlier generation do?

 

I don't understand what are you trying to point out. If you are pointing out the money, yes, surrogacy can be paid, but it does not have to be paid. It is the preference of a mother who is willing to go through it. Lots of countries have different laws about this case, and not every country sees it the same. Money is only involved if the mother wants it. If you google it, you can easily find out everything about it.

 

Perhaps, but raising a kid is what matters. Sure, you might have missed on some sweet moments while being with your own wife while she is pregnant, but in the end, the best memories come after that.

 

Kid needs male and female parents -- yin and yang. Welcome to your universe. I sure as #### had nothing to do with creating it.

Take it up with the Big Guy. Oh, by the way, our nasty little pus-pocket of a universe is soooooooo far removed from its Creator, that I'm seriously doubting if you should expect any reply save that He will alter your life's path to provide answers ... which is to say that you will end up damaged by the course-work. Me, I'm old enough to know to dodge lighting bolts. Ask God about His intent and you should then avoid walking barefoot on anything metal. Just saying.

 

I am not gonna ask the Big Guy anything. Most "prophets" these days will claim everything is false and flawed, which actually is true. Worst thing is, those who try to spread the "Good" word are usually the ones doing far more damage than regular folk. Not aiming at you or your post, but in general, people judge too often on their own, yet half of them don't even understand their own religion.

 

Spot on. Well, children should have both parents, it is the only right way to raise a kid, but by not giving people who cant have kids a chance to get it by surrogacy is also wrong. There are many single parents who handle everything just perfectly. As a matter of fact one of my close friends has been left behind by his father when he was born and his mom had to do all around him. He is a grown man today, lives a normal life. I don't see why surrogacy should be seen any different.

So, if you put it this way. Lets say a couple has a baby. One of the parents dies due to certain reason, would you say that the other parent MUST find someone else. No, they don't have to.