What Money Can Buy: A Womb for Rent

Just when I think I've heard it all, something like this comes along.

Most of us are familiar with the fact that many jobs (such as phone customer service/tech support) have been moved to India. And I've posted about how people are now traveling to India for major medical procedures. But these things are not the only services being farmed out to India. The latest job outsourced? Surrogate mothers. The details:

A team of maids, cooks and doctors looks after the women, whose pregnancies would be unusual anywhere else but are common here. The young mothers of Anand, a place famous for its milk, are pregnant with the children of infertile couples from around the world.

The small clinic at Kaival Hospital matches infertile couples with local women, cares for the women during pregnancy and delivery, and counsels them afterward. Anand's surrogate mothers, pioneers in the growing field of outsourced pregnancies, have given birth to roughly 40 babies.

More than 50 women in this city are now pregnant with the children of couples from the United States, Taiwan, Britain and beyond. The women earn more than many would make in 15 years. But the program raises a host of uncomfortable questions that touch on morals and modern science, exploitation and globalization, and that most natural of desires: to have a family.

Here's an actual example of a case:

Ritu Sodhi, a furniture importer from Los Angeles who was born in India, spent $200,000 trying to get pregnant through in-vitro fertilization, and was considering spending another $80,000 to hire a surrogate mother in the United States. Then, on the Internet, Sodhi found Patel's clinic.

After spending about $20,000 -- more than many couples because it took the surrogate mother several cycles to conceive -- Sodhi and her husband are now back home with their 4-month-old baby, Neel. They plan to return to Anand for a second child.

Here's the benefit to the surrogate:

Suman Dodia, a pregnant, baby-faced 26-year-old, said she will buy a house with the $4,500 she receives from the British couple whose child she's carrying. It would have taken her 15 years to earn that on her maid's monthly salary of $25.

And a few more details:

The surrogate mothers and the parents sign a contract that promises the couple will cover all medical expenses in addition to the woman's payment, and the surrogate mother will hand over the baby after birth. The couples fly to Anand for the in-vitro fertilization and again for the birth. Most couples end up paying the clinic less than $10,000 for the entire procedure, including fertilization, the fee to the mother and medical expenses.

Health experts expect to see more Indian commercial surrogacy programs in coming years. Dr. Indira Hinduja, a prominent fertility specialist who was behind India's first test-tube baby two decades ago, receives several surrogacy inquiries a month from couples overseas.

This simply raises so many questions -- I don't know where to start. Or end for that matter.

While I process it, here are my initial thoughts:

1. Why are people so fixated on having a baby "of their own" when there are so many needy children already born that need to be adopted?

2. Maybe the answer to #1 now has to do with cost. $10k for a surrogate in India can be much cheaper than many adoptions. Wow, that really changes the "game".

3. Being a surrogate just once can change the Indian woman's life forever. Imaging if you found a job where you could "work" for nine months and get paid 15 times your salary. Assuming the average American makes $50,000 a year (I'm not sure this is right, but it's close enough), that means it would be the U.S. equivalent of earning $750,000 for nine months work. Would that change your life? Probably.

4. How about the moral/ethical side of this? Yeah, it's strange going all the way over to India, but we have surrogates over here, so that part of the equation is accepted. Is it the fact that the Indian women are generally poor that adds somewhat of an "ick" factor? Does it seem like they are being exploited? Is this any different than U.S. surrogates?

So much to consider...

Comments

[plonkee]

Wow. Personally, I think kids are not that important, but each to their own. I'm not convinced by industrial surrogacy, I feel like there's going to be some consequence that we've missed.

[Mrs. Micah]

Like plonkee, I wouldn't be surprised if there are things we're missing. At the same time, it may be very meaningful to some people to help out those who can't have babies...and make a good living while doing it.

I don't think I could be a surrogate because I don't know if I'd want to give up the baby.

[beastlike]

That's nuts....

I can understand number 1 - I don't think I could ever adopt... However, if my wife and I are unable to naturally have a kid, I think we'll just accept that God has other plans for us......

[Meg]

I have actually read a lot about this, and I don't think it's a bad thing at all. Surrogate mothers have been a reality for a long time in our culture, and no one sees those women as being taken advantage of or manipulated. The truth is that being a surrogate CAN change the life of an Indian woman - and her whole family - forever. It gives them the financial means to own real estate and send their children to college. And yes, it saves the American mother lots of money. As the industry stands now, it's a win-win for everyone. I could see how certain companies might go in and try to exploit the Indian women, but as long as the business remains highly regulated and safe then I see no problem with it.

[Brooke]

No, adoption is a cheap and viable alternative! Our adoption only cost $4500 and it is FULLY reimbursable by taxes. I would go with an American or even international adoption anyday over creating a new child that is replacing one that probably needs a lot of what you can offer.

[Anitra]

I don't think it's exploitation, and I do think that it changes the financial equation for infertile couples drastically. Most international adoptions have a comparable cost, and domestic private-party adoptions are much more costly, usually without a guarantee that the birth mother will give up the child after it is born.

The only cost-effective option for couples today is adoption through state-run agencies... and many couples shy away from this, as it is usually older children who have been taken away from abusive families and are more likely to act out.

[Jessica]

my sister in law (in the US) is has been a surrogate twice and had three children. She's had several children of her own. She just loves being pregnant. The money helped their family buy a house and do some renovations on it...

There is certainly no explotation there. This is an all expenses paid deal including maternity clothes, a nanny for her current children during the last trimester, maid service, trips to the home location of the couple (she went to london a couple times with one of the 'jobs').

This isn't a bad deal is you're making $8 an hour at your regular job.

I generally think that people shouldn't be so hung up on a genetically related child. There are plenty of children in the world who could use a good home.

BTW this isn't just for the rich. The last couple that she worked with went way WAY in debt to be able to pay for this....

[Asithi]

I can understand why someone wants a biological child. But if you are not meant to have any child of your own, and you got one through a surrogate mother, shouldn't you just adopt when you want a second kid? Isn't trying to get two biological children, just because you can afford it, being a little greedy?

[Matt]

It's a good deal for the women, and probably a good deal for the parents.

My question would be over the legal issues. Specifically, what happens if the surrogate mother changes her mind at (or after) the last minute, the way bio-mothers in adoptions can and do? Will Indian courts enforce the contract as-written? If not, will American courts order cops to come to your home and reposess the baby for deportation back to India?

The problem with adoption isn't necessarily the cost (although depending on circumstances, it can cost an awful lot), it's the uncertainty. Until the adoption had been final for six months, it could be rescinded at any time on a whim. And it can be rescinded even after that, if an unknown father reappears in the picture to challenge it. Adoptive parents can never be truly secure in the stability of their families until the child turns 18. Surrogacy deals with some of these concerns, but does not completely erase the possibility that the birth mother might change her mind...and given the hell that many couples in the US have gone through, with a far more developed legal system, I'd be hesitant to trust Indian contract law on this until there have been some test cases.

I don't truck with the "exploitation" claim, though. These women aren't being dragged off the street, strapped into the stirrups, and forcibly inseminated. They're freely choosing to take on the responsibility, and they're getting paid very well for it.