Personal Response: Surrogate mothers

“The Akanksha clinic is at the forefront of India’s booming trade in so-called reproductive tourism — foreigners coming to the country for infertility treatments such as in vitro fertilization. The clinic’s main draw, however, is its success using local women to have foreigners’ babies. Surrogacy costs about $12,000 in India, including all medical expenses and the surrogate’s fee. In the U.S., the same procedure can cost up to $70,000.”

In the last years we've seen how technology has opened new areas to the human behavior, which, of course, are firmly related with ethics. One of them is Surrogacy, in which someone with fertility problems rents a woman's body to develop an embryo. At first we could think that this practice is totally okay, as the person is paying for a service and, moreover, he is encouraging the development of life. However, when a person decides to have a child is because he thinks he we'll have some benefits from it, like happiness, companionship or the sense of being part of a family. Although one could say this represents a fair cause, at the same time we have to see the child's experience. When someone decides to have a son or daughter by surrogacy, he is also determining the life of the child. The boy will not have a mother, or at least a "real" one. Moreover, he'll probably share the phenotype of his indian mother, which is not his father's, but the child will never meet her. The question here is, at what extent can we control our children's lives? Is it correct to conceive a love from money, and not from love?

The Indian women case is also very peculiar, as they are using their body to earn money, just like prostitution. While they get some money, women are also renting the most important part of their bodies, and taking personal advantage of the sacred ability to reproduce.