2013-03-05, 03:16 PM
She knew what she signed up for. She was to carry the surrogate baby, she signed a contract stating that if the baby had serious life threatening problems it would be considered for an abortion.
I think she honestly had no right to refuse the abortion. It was NOT her baby, she was merely the surrogate PAID to carry it. If this was some form of informal agreement between friends or family it would be a different story. But she was under legal obligation to do good by the contract she signed, and what she was being paid for.
Why should her "religous and moral" rights be worth more than the parents who had their own moral rights regarding that they didn't want to bring another sick child into the world to suffer?
She broke her contract, tried to squeeze money out of the clearly heartbroken parents and then left them no choice but to give the baby to her. It makes it out like the parents did wrong in refusing the child, but it was their choice of whether the baby would live in suffering or not be born, and it was taken away from them by someone who had no real right to do so.
Why the hell would she take a job like this if she had moral objections to abortion? or if she was going to get attached to the child?
a truly disgusting woman in my opinion.
Also, the article seems clearly biased towards the surrogate in my opinion. Even in the title, like she's an innocent woman being bribed to do something horrible.
I think she honestly had no right to refuse the abortion. It was NOT her baby, she was merely the surrogate PAID to carry it. If this was some form of informal agreement between friends or family it would be a different story. But she was under legal obligation to do good by the contract she signed, and what she was being paid for.
Why should her "religous and moral" rights be worth more than the parents who had their own moral rights regarding that they didn't want to bring another sick child into the world to suffer?
She broke her contract, tried to squeeze money out of the clearly heartbroken parents and then left them no choice but to give the baby to her. It makes it out like the parents did wrong in refusing the child, but it was their choice of whether the baby would live in suffering or not be born, and it was taken away from them by someone who had no real right to do so.
Why the hell would she take a job like this if she had moral objections to abortion? or if she was going to get attached to the child?
a truly disgusting woman in my opinion.
Also, the article seems clearly biased towards the surrogate in my opinion. Even in the title, like she's an innocent woman being bribed to do something horrible.