Author Topic: Surrogacy (Read 680 times)

poche · « **on:** February 25, 2016, 04:18:11 AM »

A set of newborn triplets are now being tended to in a California hospital, unaware of their place at the center of a complex legal battle that could have huge implications for surrogacy and parental rights.

The babies were delivered several weeks premature Monday night, according to a lawyer for Melissa Cook, the 47-year-old surrogate mother from Woodland Hills who refused the biological father’s demands that she have an abortion. That man, a deaf, 50-year-old postal worker from Georgia identified in court papers as “C.M.,” paid Cook to carry anonymously donated eggs he fertilized in the hopes of having children. But Cook, who describes herself as pro-life, refused to have an abortion, and is seeking parental rights.

"I'm healthy, I'm 28 weeks pregnant, the babies are doing great, the three little boys I have inside me," Cook told Fox News outside court earlier this month before they were born.

In California, a gestational surrogate – a woman who carries a donor’s eggs - has no parental rights, but Cook is challenging the state's surrogacy law in federal court, claiming it is unconstitutional.

"It's an attempt to reduce women to an object, or a breeding animal," charges Cook's lawyer, Harold Cassidy, a nationally prominent pro-life and anti-surrogacy lawyer who is calling for a moratorium on surrogacy.

"You can doctor this up, you can play word games with it, but this is simply and purely the sale of a child," he added.

Cassidy told Fox News that the minute the babies were born, they were immediately taken from Cook because a state court judge had granted the father parental rights, a ruling Cassidy is appealing.

"The hospital personnel refused to let Melissa see the children, allow her to know what their condition is, refused to tell her their exact weights, and she is not being permitted to see the children at all," Cassidy said. "We have a mother who loves them, who fought for them, who defended their life, who stands ready to take care of them. You can't tell a mother who gives birth to children that what happens to the children is none of her business."

Court docuмents reveal correspondence involving Cook and C.M., including a Sept. 18, 2015 message the father wrote to his attorney to say visits to a fertility clinic by Cook, whose pregnancy was deemed high-risk due to her age, were "draining my finances."

"I do not want to abort twin babies, but I felt that is such possible (sic) to seek aborting all three babies,” he wrote. “I do not want to affect Melissa’s health. I do not have any more money in the bank, and my job does not pay great bi-weekly."

Cook’s lawsuit says that, “C.M. depleted his life savings paying for the infertility doctors, paying the surrogacy broker, paying the anonymous ova donor, paying the lawyers and putting money into trust for the surrogate," prompting “his demand that Melissa have an abortion because he could not financially afford the children and was otherwise incapable of raising the children."

Surrogacy contracts typically allow for what is known “selective reduction,” where an embryo or fetus can be aborted, usually for medical reasons. The contract in this case was not made available to Fox News.

Last Nov. 24, according to the lawsuit, C.M. wrote: "My decision made is, requires a selection reduction (sic). I am so sorry."

Cook, who was hired through Santa Barbara-based Surrogacy International, claims that she was threatened with legal and financial damages if she refused to undergo the procedure.

Robert Walmsley, co-owner of Surrogacy International, which is not named in the federal lawsuit, has reportedly said that Cook was asked to only abort one fetus because doctors were concerned about possible abnormalities. Walmsley, who is also C.M.’s lawyer, declined an interview request from Fox News, citing his client's and Cook's privacy. He issued a statement on behalf of C.M. in which the biological father vowed not to discuss the case publicly out of concern for parties involved, including the three children.

C.M. said in the statement he thinks it would be inappropriate to discuss the issues “outside the judicial process.”
"There have been many misrepresentations made about this matter,” the statement read in part. “I have addressed those misrepresentations in the appropriate forum -the judicial system -and the appropriate Court has heard both sides and issued a correct ruling based on California law and any constitutional issues that there may be. I stand by the Court's ruling.

"My interest is in protecting my three children,” the statement added. “I continue to have concern for the health and welfare of the surrogate and wish to avoid her having unnecessary stress through a public presentation. I have no interest in sensationalizing the situation."

Cassidy has spent decades challenging abortion and surrogacy laws across the country.

He represented surrogate mother Mary Beth Whitehead, in the landmark 1987 New Jersey court case known as "Baby M," which ultimately invalidated surrogacy laws in that state. Whitehead had been inseminated with the sperm of the intended father, but then refused to give up the infant. The parents, William and Elizabeth Stern, were given custody of the baby girl and Whitehead was granted visiting rights. "Baby M" grew up to be the now 29-year-old Melissa Stern, who is married with her own children.

According to the Creative Family Connections law firm in Maryland, 33 states allow some form of surrogacy, and the practice has given countless parents children.

The American Society for Reproductive Medicine estimates that about 1,600 babies are born each year in the United States through gestational surrogacy, such as Cook's.

But Cassidy notes that surrogacy has been outlawed in most of Europe and Canada. While he acknowledges the blessings of the results for many desperate parents, he believes that "the focus is wrong" and belongs on the children.

"Some man who donates sperm on the other side of the country is a stranger to that child, so much so that it is nothing for him to demand that the mother who loves the children he's carrying has to kill one of them,” he said. “So his focus was not on the children, his focus was on what he wanted, what he could do, what he was capable of without any regard for what's best for the children. And quite frankly, for a state to pass a statute that says the children should be turned over to someone who admits that he cannot care for the children is not good at all, and by the way, the way it's written, it is not constitutional."

This is the second time that Cook served as a surrogate mother, she did so three years ago. She is seeking in court to be declared the legal mother of the infants, and Cassidy says that she is prepared to care for one or all of the babies if C.M., the father, cannot.

"I want what's best for them," Cook said outside court on Feb. 8. "These court proceedings are for them, to determine what is going to be in their best interest."

The Los Angeles County Health Department, which is named in the federal suit, did not respond to Fox News' request for comment.

http://www.foxnews.com/health/2016/02/24/california-triplets-at-center-thorny-surrogacy-case-pro-life-debate.html

poche · « **Reply #1 on:** March 04, 2016, 12:31:49 AM »

When Crystal Kelley met the couple she ended up being a surrogate for in 2011, she says she felt an immediate connection.

"They offered to come and meet me near my home," Kelley, 33, of Vernon, Connecticut, tells PEOPLE. "It was very nice when we met. I really liked them."

After spending time with the couple and their three kids at a nearby playground, Kelley says it was obvious that the couple loved their children.

"They were interactive with their kids," says Kelley. "Their father was playing with them and they were all having a great time. Their mom and I were just standing to the side watching them and she couldn't stop smiling."

Afterwards, they sat down and talked about why the couple wanted to find a surrogate mother.

"She teared up," says Kelley. "She was very emotional as she talked about how they only had two embryos left and they were reaching the end of their five-year storage time and they had to make the decision very soon whether they were going to keep them or get rid of them." (The couple had used an anonymous egg donor.)

Kelley says she immediately saw "the emotions in her eyes."

Later that night, Kelley sent the agent for her surrogacy an email saying that she loved the couple and would be more than happy to carry for them.

That blissful vision was short-lived.

While going over the contract, something about the abortion clause didn't sit well with Kelley.

"Originally, it said [the parents] could ask for an abortion at any time and for any reason," she says.

Kelley wanted the clause taken out altogether, but settled with abortion only being an option if the baby had a severe fetal abnormality determined by 3D ultrasound.

"I thought there was such a small chance that anything was going to happen," she says. "I absolutely regret that. It's tough to think back on."

Kelley learned she was pregnant eight days after she had the embryo transfer. The mother would call her almost every day and send her texts and emails.

"They would say, 'We're so excited. Do you think it's a boy or girl?' "

At 18 weeks pregnant, Kelley learned the baby was a girl after an ultrasound. The mother, who already had two boys and one girl, was over the moon.

They were also told that they couldn't see the baby's heart well enough, and to come back for another ultrasound two weeks later.

It was then that "everything started to fall apart," she says.

When the follow-up ultrasound revealed troubling results, Kelley received a call from the mother, who had already learned that the baby had a possible heart defect.

"She called and said, 'My husband and I have really thought about this and discussed it. We have had preemies and we know what challenges preemies face and we really don't want to bring another disabled baby into the world.'

"That was when I started to get really worried. I'm standing outside in the sun and then all of a sudden I got cold and clammy," she recalls. "It was all of a sudden, like everything switched. I told her, 'Let's remember we talked about this. I'm not willing to terminate a pregnancy for a child with a disability. I'm not terminating the pregnancy unless the baby is going to die.' "

On Her Own
Four days later, Kelley had another ultrasound, which confirmed what had been detected the week before.

The baby not only had a heart defect, but ultrasound technicians couldn't locate the fetus' stomach and also learned she had a cleft lip.

While Kelley was ready to get further tests, she says the parents made it clear they didn't want to move forward with the pregnancy.

"They said they didn't think it was the direction they wanted to go and that they didn't want to continue this knowing this child is going to be born and is going to suffer," she remembers.

Kelley says she told them, "You don't know that she is going to suffer. You don't know yet what's really going on. All we have is this ultrasound and the one before, which doesn't really give us any answers."

Kelley already had a daughter of her own who had fully recovered from heart surgery and wanted to give this baby the same chance.

"My daughter is happy, healthy and absolutely full of energy. You look at her and you can't tell that there was anything was ever wrong with her," she says. "So I wasn't just going to give up on this baby."

After that conversation, Kelley never saw or spoke to the parents again.

All correspondence was through the agent or a lawyer, who told her she was "obligated to terminate this pregnancy immediately."

At that point, Kelley was just a few weeks away from being 24 weeks pregnant. After that, she couldn't legally abort the pregnancy.

When she sat down with a lawyer who asked her if she would consider having an abortion, she confidently told him, "no."

"I told him that I'm not going to terminate just because they want me to. If there was something wrong and they could prove it and they could prove that she was going to die before she was born or right after she was born, then I might have a different answer. If she's going to live, I need to give her that chance."

Although Kelley decided to go through with the pregnancy, she didn't anticipate what was to come next.
Because she didn't have parental rights for the baby in the state of Connecticut after the baby girl was born, the baby would most likely become a warden of the state.

"I wasn't going to have a baby knowing that she would immediately go into foster care," says Kelley. "This baby was created on purpose. She should not end up in the foster system, especially being a child of special needs."

So she decided to make a drastic move and pack her kids up and head to Michigan, where under state law she had legal rights as the child's mother.

Soon after, the baby's father gave up his parental rights under the condition that he and his wife could keep in touch with the adoptive family about the baby. They also demanded information about the birth and wanted their name on the birth certificate.

Living in an on-campus apartment at the University Michigan in Ann Arbor with her two young daughters, Kelley spent the final two months of her pregnancy thinking about the baby girl's future.

With little money and no job at the time, Kelley knew that she wasn't in the best situation to raise the baby, so she was determined to find her a loving and happy home.

"My friend had a good friend who was a mom to three kids with special needs and she had adopted two of them. She told me she'd be a great resource for me," Kelley says. "We became close and when I asked her if she would adopt her, she said yes."

When Baby S – her adoptive parents are comfortable using her first initial – was born on June 25, 2012, "she did amazing," Kelley shares.

It's pretty vindicating, I guess, because everyone else wanted to give up on her," says Kelley. "She's always been a fighter. She was feisty even when I was pregnant with her."

Today, the baby is 3 years old and is an "an outspoken kid in her own little way."

"She doesn't let things hold her back. It makes me feel great, but I knew she was going to be like this," says Kelley, who sees the little girl twice a year in Michigan and wrote a book about her experience.

"You have to listen to your gut and by listening to my gut, I was proven right," she continues. "Everything that I believed she would be, she is. She's alive, she's capable, she's growing and learning and doing things that normal toddlers do."

http://news.yahoo.com/surrogate-mom-gives-birth-baby-223347709.html

poche · « **Reply #2 on:** March 05, 2016, 01:39:20 AM »

Ring's first time as a surrogate mother couldn't have gone any better – that is, until the baby boy was born.

"There was just something that wasn't right, and I couldn't put my finger on it," Ring, 54, tells PEOPLE of the moments soon after the baby's birth in October 2000.

"[The parents] weren't that excited, but they said they wanted to do it again. I felt like I shouldn't."

But Ring, who lives in Salt Lake City, Utah, put that feeling to the side and went forward with another surrogate pregnancy for the couple.

During an ultrasound on May 10, 2001, Ring found out she was pregnant with triplets, but she instantly knew that the mother wasn't happy with the news.

"It went to hell," Ring recalls.

A Change of Heart
After digesting the news that they were having triplets, the mother and father asked Ring to reduce to twins, which she reluctantly did.

"If I didn't have the reduction, they were going to sue me for breach of contract," says Susan.

Then at four months pregnant (with healthy twins), Ring began to have trouble getting in touch with the babies' parents – in fact, they were nowhere to be found.

"They weren't calling," she says. "The agency finally came to my house and told me that the couple ran out of money, were getting divorced and didn't want the twins."

Ring was in absolute disbelief.

"It was a really tough time," she recalls. "There was the horror of the reduction and then they didn't want the two that were left."

Ring, a single mother of two at the time who was also running a daycare, didn't know what to do.

Desperate for answers – and just one month before her due date – she drove over to their condo and walked up to the front door.

When they didn't come to the door, Ring called the mother and told her she was prepared to make a scene if she didn't come talk to her.

Finally, the mother came outside and told Ring the startlingly news.

"She said that her husband is bipolar, which was news to me. I was speechless," she says. "She told me that the babies would go to social services after the birth and that they were my problem now."

Fighting for Their Future
Ring was still in denial that the parents wanted nothing to do with their babies.

But when the twins were born on Nov. 29, 2001, the parents weren't there for the birth.

Ring says the severity of the situation finally hit her when social services showed up to the hospital. (The couple still had parental rights and wanted the baby to go into foster care.)

Despite her attorney's advice not to sue, Ring filed a lawsuit for breach of contract and within 24 hours, the parents said they would let go of their parental rights if she promised to drop the suit. Ring immediately agreed.

The first three months of the twin's lives were spent with Ring. And although she tried to not get attached, she couldn't help but form a bond with them.

"In my head, I knew they were never mine," says Ring, who went on to become a surrogate for three more families. "I was only thinking about finding them a loving family – a mother and father who wanted to have them. I knew there was no way I could have taken them, but I was torn."

Ring ended up finding the twins "an amazing home," and today, they're happy 14-year-olds who still keep in touch with their surrogate mother.

"Our relationship is great," says Ring, who had her third biological child – a daughter – in 2012. "I always tell them, if they ever need me, I'm here for them. I knew I had to find them a wonderful home and I did."

"I just knew that two healthy, beautiful babies were not going to go to social services. I couldn't let it happen," says Ring, who is now trying to find a surrogate to have a child for her.

"I decided that I want another baby, but this time Iâ€™m the one looking for a surrogate. My fertility was everything to me. A lot of women know when theyâ€™re done having babies and I never got that memo."

http://news.yahoo.com/parents-shockingly-back-surrogate-mom-200638733.html

Author Topic: Surrogacy (Read 680 times)

poche

Surrogacy

poche

Surrogacy

poche

Surrogacy