Are designers babies only commodities?

[hinduwoman]

If someone has paid for a particular baby to be born but it doesnot their expectations when it finally appears, can the parents abandon it without consequences? Is the baby an 'it' or a human?

ANOTHER surrogate baby has been abandoned by an Australian couple after a senior Australian federal politician reportedly intervened to get them a visa for their chosen child. The ABC reports that a surrogate mother gave birth to twins — and their genetic make up is unknown — in India after Australian parents commissioned the surrogacy via an agency.
The Australian couple, who already had one child, are believed to have made the decision to keep one of the twins based on its gender.
A joint investigation by ABC News and Foreign Correspondent revealed the case from 2012 where the couple only wanted one of the babies.
The sex of the twins is believed to have been a concern for the parents, who already had one child.
While consular staff at the Australian High Commission in New Delhi tried to convince the couple to take both babies, they failed in their attempts.
A federal politician, who has not been named and who may not even be in the current parliament, reportedly stepped in and pressured the High Commission to grant a visa for the baby the couple wanted to bring home.
The unwanted baby was later given to another family, but its current location is unknown, and fears have been raised that money may have changed hands for the child.
...
The Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade have not responded to questions about whether it was investigating the allegations before publication.

Should the parents be punished for deserting their child? or a case of not satisfactory goods?

 

[Bronzeage]

If someone has paid for a particular baby to be born but it doesnot their expectations when it finally appears, can the parents abandon it without consequences? Is the baby an 'it' or a human?

ANOTHER surrogate baby has been abandoned by an Australian couple after a senior Australian federal politician reportedly intervened to get them a visa for their chosen child. The ABC reports that a surrogate mother gave birth to twins — and their genetic make up is unknown — in India after Australian parents commissioned the surrogacy via an agency.
The Australian couple, who already had one child, are believed to have made the decision to keep one of the twins based on its gender.
A joint investigation by ABC News and Foreign Correspondent revealed the case from 2012 where the couple only wanted one of the babies.
The sex of the twins is believed to have been a concern for the parents, who already had one child.
While consular staff at the Australian High Commission in New Delhi tried to convince the couple to take both babies, they failed in their attempts.
A federal politician, who has not been named and who may not even be in the current parliament, reportedly stepped in and pressured the High Commission to grant a visa for the baby the couple wanted to bring home.
The unwanted baby was later given to another family, but its current location is unknown, and fears have been raised that money may have changed hands for the child.
...
The Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade have not responded to questions about whether it was investigating the allegations before publication.

Should the parents be punished for deserting their child? or a case of not satisfactory goods?

Is it legal to take the parents out back and beat the living shit out of them? At the least, the parents are obligated for 18 years child support at a level their other children enjoy.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

There really should be a "no refunds or exchanges" policy attached to surrogacy. If the fetus ends up having some unwanted condition like down's syndrome or femaleness and they can convince the surrogate to abort, then that's fine, but otherwise beginning the process should carry with it a legal obligation to care for any and all children which result from the process.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

There really should be a "no refunds or exchanges" policy attached to surrogacy. If the fetus ends up having some unwanted condition like down's syndrome or femaleness and they can convince the surrogate to abort, then that's fine, but otherwise beginning the process should carry with it a legal obligation to care for any and all children which result from the process.

If the surrogate accepts a contract that includes aborting in such situations then I see no reason the bio parents should be required to accept a child the contract said should be aborted. The surrogate should consider her opinions on abortion before signing such a contract.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

There really should be a "no refunds or exchanges" policy attached to surrogacy. If the fetus ends up having some unwanted condition like down's syndrome or femaleness and they can convince the surrogate to abort, then that's fine, but otherwise beginning the process should carry with it a legal obligation to care for any and all children which result from the process.

If the surrogate accepts a contract that includes aborting in such situations then I see no reason the bio parents should be required to accept a child the contract said should be aborted. The surrogate should consider her opinions on abortion before signing such a contract.

Yes, everything should be clearly spelled out in the initial contract. If they clearly don't want a child with health issues or they clearly only want a boy or they clearly only want one child instead of multiples, then all parties should be aware of the various permutations upfront. You shouldn't have cases like the Down's Syndrome baby who got abandoned or like this one where they only take the boy child and the surrogate is shocked to find the predicament that she's in. Everyone should know that if X happens, they do Y.

The default, however, for any situations not covered in the various clauses should be that the parents are responsible for the child and trying to walk away from it is treated the same as any other case of a parent abandoning their child. If you don't specify that you're not going to pay for a kid with health issues and it ends up with Down's Syndrome or needs ten years worth of surgeries to repair underdeveloped lungs, that's your problem to deal with and you can't walk away from it. If you don't specify gender and then realize that you wanted a boy but the fetus is female, then tough shit, you have a daughter.

Additionally, you can't force a surrogate to have an abortion. You can walk away based on the clauses but then it's up to her to decide what to do with her body. If she wants to abort then she can but if not, you're going to end up with a child who's biologically yours but is being raised by someone else and you need to be OK with that possibility.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

If the surrogate accepts a contract that includes aborting in such situations then I see no reason the bio parents should be required to accept a child the contract said should be aborted. The surrogate should consider her opinions on abortion before signing such a contract.

Yes, everything should be clearly spelled out in the initial contract. If they clearly don't want a child with health issues or they clearly only want a boy or they clearly only want one child instead of multiples, then all parties should be aware of the various permutations upfront. You shouldn't have cases like the Down's Syndrome baby who got abandoned or like this one where they only take the boy child and the surrogate is shocked to find the predicament that she's in. Everyone should know that if X happens, they do Y.

The default, however, for any situations not covered in the various clauses should be that the parents are responsible for the child and trying to walk away from it is treated the same as any other case of a parent abandoning their child. If you don't specify that you're not going to pay for a kid with health issues and it ends up with Down's Syndrome or needs ten years worth of surgeries to repair underdeveloped lungs, that's your problem to deal with and you can't walk away from it. If you don't specify gender and then realize that you wanted a boy but the fetus is female, then tough shit, you have a daughter.

Additionally, you can't force a surrogate to have an abortion. You can walk away based on the clauses but then it's up to her to decide what to do with her body. If she wants to abort then she can but if not, you're going to end up with a child who's biologically yours but is being raised by someone else and you need to be OK with that possibility.

I agree, the default is they take whatever biology makes. I wouldn't assume that it's really a surprise, though--remember the previous case where she refused to abort and then made a fuss when they wouldn't take the baby.