Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)


There was a segment on Dr. Phil a week ago about a surrogate who kept the babies from the mother because the mother said she had a mental illness, but her records said that she was fully capable of taking care of her children. The surrogate mothre took the children anyway and won't allow the mother to have custody of them.

Anyone have issues like this with surrogacy? And do you trust another person to carry your children even though you can't yourself?

Answer Question

Asked by Imogine at 10:50 PM on Feb. 3, 2010 in General Parenting

Level 22 (14,425 Credits)
Answers (7)
  • This is why most clinics now require surogates to carry a child that is NOT biologically theirs. I'm surprised she's able to get away with this.

    Answer by Anonymous at 10:56 PM on Feb. 3, 2010

  • That's the wasn't hers. The embryo belonged to the couple unable to have children.

    Answer by Imogine at 11:42 PM on Feb. 3, 2010

  • She should have no rights to it then. I hope those parents can afford a good lawyer and not only get their child back but sue her for causing all this emotional trauma.

    Answer by Allergic2Stupid at 11:47 PM on Feb. 3, 2010

  • THe surrogate parents seemed psycho anway. I would kick that woman's ass if it were. I would not be so civil.

    Answer by Imogine at 11:49 PM on Feb. 3, 2010

  • Its sad but they did it in a stat the does not recognize surrogacy. Legally she has the rights to the children because she carreid them. I personally think this woman should be jailed on kidnapping charges

    Answer by lovemybabys1106 at 12:04 AM on Feb. 4, 2010

  • The embryo belonged to the couple who hired the surrogate because they bought the sperm and egg, the children were not biologically either set of parents. I also watched the Dr Phil show due to a personal interest (I graduated HS with the surrogate). Dr Phil really annoyed me with the generalization that people with mental illness shouldnt have children, which was not what she was saying at all. But a unspecified psychotic disorder is something else entirely. We're not talking about depression or anxiety, we're talking psychosis. I cant honestly say what I would do in that situation, but I have to admit, turning the babies over to someone with a psychotic disorder would give me pause too. On the other hand, my heart bleeds for the prospective adoptive parents, to first have to deal with infertility, failed IVF treatments, a sucessful surrogate pregnancy that resulted in twins, and a month with the twins, cont

    Answer by Tarinia at 2:11 AM on Feb. 4, 2010

  • only to have to give them up again a month later...the grief the Kehoes have suffered tears at my heart. There was so much done wrong in this "contract", including the fact that Michigan doesnt recognize surrogate contracts. Because of Michigan law, there's precious little black and white and a ton of areas of grey. Legally, because they arent biologically related to either set of parents, they belong to the person who gave birth to them. Morally, ethically, I couldnt say...Im glad I wasnt put in that position to have to make that choice.

    Answer by Tarinia at 2:15 AM on Feb. 4, 2010

Join CafeMom now to contribute your answer and become part of our community. It's free and takes just a minute.