Bringing Children into this World

catholicmom

Pigeon
I had once considered the possibility of being a surrogate, because pregnancy and childbirth were very easy for me. So I looked quite a bit into the details of that, focusing on the most-preferred method which is basically IVF, typically involving transfer/implantation of multiple embryos from the prospective parents (or donors they have sourced).

I learned that the gift of life gleaned from this process generally necessarily comes at the cost of an equal-or-greater life sacrifice. Multiples are routinely implanted because often only one, if any, will "stick." In the case of multiples sticking and proving viable, many are faced with the "necessity" for "pregnancy reduction" (in other words, termination of all implanted embryos above a certain number). Typically, from what I understand, many embryos are created that never end up used. Batch process is most efficient due to harvesting methods and affords best chance of at least one success for the trouble/expense. These "leftover" embryos would either be destroyed, or in some cases sold, used for research... and who even knows what else. Some people cite that they can be "saved" - but I'm not sure how long, and I suspect for most people that's just pushing back the clock rather than changing the ultimate outcome.

I can't reconcile that with my own conscience, I know that.
In addition to everything you outlined here, it is also traumatic for the babies involved. The gestational carrier is the only mother that the baby knows, but the baby is effectively immediately ripped away from her after the birth. Your voice, your smell, the unique movement of your hips, etc. are all GONE. It is different from typical infant adoption in that adoption is making the best of a preexisting unfortunate situation (as opposed to abortion); with surrogacy, trauma is manufactured from nothing.

Disregard the feminist content, but if anyone is interested, this was a very illuminating interview with an anti-surrogacy activist who was herself a former surrogate. I'm generally pretty stoic but this made me tear up. :sad:

There are known psychological effects that come from being adopted even at birth. Add to that that donor-conceived individuals can conceivably have not two, but five "parents" (sperm donor, egg donor, surrogate, adoptive father, adoptive mother). How can a child even begin to understand that? I can't even begin to imagine how confusing and traumatic that must be for a child.
 

muhtea

Sparrow
I don't even like the adoption industry. I don't know what the solution is, but I think as much as possible if there is some cause for removing a baby from its parents or the parents don't want it, every effort should be made to place the child with family members. There's a lot of crookedness in the adoption industry too - anywhere people are making money off the trade of human beings should be viewed with suspicion.

Surrogacy is weird beyond belief. I know of some Catholics who did that - had two via two different biological mothers with his sperm. I can't for the life of me make that OK in my mind. I suppose it all just seems selfish. Human beings are not interchangeable units that you can just schlep around from one family to another. Eggs aren't yours to sell or give away. It's treating people as commodities in either case.
 
It would be interesting to hear from a few husbands on how he would feel about his wife being artificially inseminated with his donated sperm as part of the medical process. Personally, as a wife I would feel the procedure was shameful/humiliating for myself, my husband, and even God.

But that is my individual opinion that is based on a set of moral standards through Christianity, and it certainly is not meant to pass judgement on an individual who selects medical conception. Judging the morality of the medical conception process is not judging the individual - as is the same approach with denouncing abortion.

Will pray for strength, courage, and compassion to those females who are experiencing emotional turmoil with trying to conceive.
 

Starlight

Robin
I don't even like the adoption industry. I don't know what the solution is, but I think as much as possible if there is some cause for removing a baby from its parents or the parents don't want it, every effort should be made to place the child with family members. There's a lot of crookedness in the adoption industry too - anywhere people are making money off the trade of human beings should be viewed with suspicion.

Surrogacy is weird beyond belief. I know of some Catholics who did that - had two via two different biological mothers with his sperm. I can't for the life of me make that OK in my mind. I suppose it all just seems selfish. Human beings are not interchangeable units that you can just schlep around from one family to another. Eggs aren't yours to sell or give away. It's treating people as commodities in either case.
IVF and surrogacy separate conception from the marital act of intimacy (love-making) and the physical joining of two into one, which is God’s design. Once we remove that, the “creation” of a child becomes the means to an end, not a secondary blessing of marital intimacy. Children are a gift from God not a product that we “make” or “get” from someone else.

We live in a world where people aren’t (morally) told “no” very often and have a “if it feels good, do it” mindset. People go to great lengths to limit any kind of emotional pain and suffering, and will do all kinds of mental gymnastics to rationalize their behaviors for limiting that pain.
 

muhtea

Sparrow
Disregard the feminist content, but if anyone is interested, this was a very illuminating interview with an anti-surrogacy activist who was herself a former surrogate.
This story is bananas. It just keeps getting crazier. Horrifying! :vomit: Poor woman doesn't even realize her motivation is really just wanting more kids!
 

DanielH

Kingfisher
My wife wants kids but I cannot ensure enough stability up until last year, just when the plandemic hit.
So it is though on what to do.
There's never going to be a comfortable time on this earth in your life. In fact, having kids, if anything, will bring stability to your life if you love them and your wife, and Christ first. Don't deprive your wife of kids because things are uncomfortable. We need fewer dog moms and more actual mothers.
 
I'm not necessarily against all forms of surrogacy, but what I eventually concluded was that I could only ever BE a surrogate under a very unlikely set of circumstances - like if my childhood best friend/"sister" had been unable to conceive or carry a child, I'd have been willing to go the artificial insemination route and carry a child for her the "natural" way with my own eggs. Infertility was kind of "breaking" as a big thing when we were teens, and we had a kind of joking-but-serious agreement that if one of us couldn't have babies, we'd have each other's backs. Neither of us ended up having that problem, but I stand by the sentiment anyway.

It's interesting to me that "traditional surrogacy" (which is essentially/legally a form of adoption) is held out as the LEAST desirable, most taboo, most problematic, etc. sort of way for an infertile couple to "have" a baby. But when I think about it, that's the only way to do it that isn't based on IVF and doesn't have the associated cost of elective/selective embryo-culling. To me an embryo is life, period - and maybe I'd feel differently about IVF if it were done in a way that treated each embryo as a human life - but AFAIK the industry cannot do that and continue to exist. You have to pay the piper somewhere. Nobody would be willing or able to pay the price for IVF treatments that harvest and fertilize one egg at a time, but that's how many your body usually has to work with (two, tops - in most cases). The built-in cost-deferral is human sacrifice.

Traditional surrogacy is also the only way that basically forces people to face the reality of what they are doing. A lot of women would happily be a "gestational carrier" for $30k and not worry a bit about who she's handing the baby over to because it's "not hers" - but faced with the prospect of undergoing the same process using her own egg... NOW, even if she's still willing to do it, suddenly it MATTERS to her whether the parents will be good, kind, loving, protective, nurturing, etc. NOW she's more likely to only do it for someone in her own community.

There are a lot of compelling arguments for these sorts of arrangements to be PREFERRED over things like IVF/gestational surrogacy. But of course the notion of solving fertility problems within a community/family context, in the way that people routinely did before "Science and Medicine" took over, is effectively shut down with the the popularized sentiment of "ewww, handmaiden."
 

Starlight

Robin
I'm not necessarily against all forms of surrogacy, but what I eventually concluded was that I could only ever BE a surrogate under a very unlikely set of circumstances - like if my childhood best friend/"sister" had been unable to conceive or carry a child, I'd have been willing to go the artificial insemination route and carry a child for her the "natural" way with my own eggs. Infertility was kind of "breaking" as a big thing when we were teens, and we had a kind of joking-but-serious agreement that if one of us couldn't have babies, we'd have each other's backs. Neither of us ended up having that problem, but I stand by the sentiment anyway.

It's interesting to me that "traditional surrogacy" (which is essentially/legally a form of adoption) is held out as the LEAST desirable, most taboo, most problematic, etc. sort of way for an infertile couple to "have" a baby. But when I think about it, that's the only way to do it that isn't based on IVF and doesn't have the associated cost of elective/selective embryo-culling. To me an embryo is life, period - and maybe I'd feel differently about IVF if it were done in a way that treated each embryo as a human life - but AFAIK the industry cannot do that and continue to exist. You have to pay the piper somewhere. Nobody would be willing or able to pay the price for IVF treatments that harvest and fertilize one egg at a time, but that's how many your body usually has to work with (two, tops - in most cases). The built-in cost-deferral is human sacrifice.

Traditional surrogacy is also the only way that basically forces people to face the reality of what they are doing. A lot of women would happily be a "gestational carrier" for $30k and not worry a bit about who she's handing the baby over to because it's "not hers" - but faced with the prospect of undergoing the same process using her own egg... NOW, even if she's still willing to do it, suddenly it MATTERS to her whether the parents will be good, kind, loving, protective, nurturing, etc. NOW she's more likely to only do it for someone in her own community.

There are a lot of compelling arguments for these sorts of arrangements to be PREFERRED over things like IVF/gestational surrogacy. But of course the notion of solving fertility problems within a community/family context, in the way that people routinely did before "Science and Medicine" took over, is effectively shut down with the the popularized sentiment of "ewww, handmaiden."
I agree that traditional surrogacy with a family member (a sister, for instance, like you said) is probably the least problematic. It raises a few different questions than IVF, though. Would the child be considered born out of wedlock? Is it a weird gray area of infidelity/adultery for a man to impregnate a woman who is not his wife even though there wasn’t physical intimacy? Or the same thing for a woman with a man who’s not her husband? In the Old Testament, one reason a man could take a second wife (as in a concubine) was if his first wife was barren.

The issue with surrogacy is that it still separates marital intimacy from conception. Fertility treatments and contraception are different sides of the same coin. On one side, contraception takes conception out of intimacy while on the other side fertility treatments take intimacy out of conception.
 

catholicmom

Pigeon
This story is bananas. It just keeps getting crazier. Horrifying! :vomit: Poor woman doesn't even realize her motivation is really just wanting more kids!
It was just so insane. I really hope the birth mother can be reunited with her son one day. :sad: The part that got me is that the baby's purchaser (I don't even want to call her an adoptive mother) had a sperm donor AND an egg donor AND a surrogate in order to become a single-mom-by-choice! :mad: Total Veruca Salt "I WANT IT NOW!" move. Absolutely unbelievable and despicable how she treated the birth mother afterward. :vomit:

I heard another surrogacy story in which a 21-year-old American woman did an in-home insemination for an Indian couple who had never even consummated their marriage(!). The Indian biological father later got arrested for filming sexual acts between himself and a minor in another state. After he was arrested, he plotted from jail to kidnap and KILL the the child whom he had trafficked. She later found out that the biological father had been involved in a baby trafficking ring.
 
There's never going to be a comfortable time on this earth in your life. In fact, having kids, if anything, will bring stability to your life if you love them and your wife, and Christ first. Don't deprive your wife of kids because things are uncomfortable. We need fewer dog moms and more actual mothers.
But why would you bring kids in this evil world without a somewhat halfway working plan of being able to protect them from this evil times.
It will pass in 10 years as everything is cyclical.
 

DanielH

Kingfisher
But why would you bring kids in this evil world without a somewhat halfway working plan of being able to protect them from this evil times.
It will pass in 10 years as everything is cyclical.
What do you mean no working plan? Are you not a Christian? Are we not commanded to live not for this world but for the Kingdom of God? The world has always been evil since Adam and Even betrayed God. Didn't the early Christians still have children and multiply for centuries while living under persecution and worshiping in the catacombs? Teach your children to love God and they will be okay. In Orthodoxy we have a concept of apatheia, a state of the mind where you have died to your passions- you're free from them and you're only a slave to Christ voluntarily, which is the only freedom we can have. This is how we're supposed to live, with salvation in mind. The bad news on your screens only affects that if you allow it.

I hate to break it to you but Imperial Russia was going downhill for a long time and then the Bolsheviks took over and that lasted for a lifetime. Stevdn Crowder deprived his wife of children because he was afraid of muslims. Well guess what, now he lives in a tyrannical state, so I guess theyll just never have kids now. If you try to time this you will never have kids because life isn't as easy to predict as you think. All we can assume is things will generally get worse, as the Book of Revelation tells us, but that's okay when you consider children adapt to their situations. Children living in warzones on average are probably enjoying life more than the average American child, because the former live for God and are immersed by loving families, while the latter has been abandoned to screens and the state. If you feel weak it's only because good times make weak men, weak men create hard times, and hard times make strong men who make good times. Your children will probably be stronger than you and will become saints. Same with my future children, God willing.
 

normiewife

Chicken
What do you mean no working plan? Are you not a Christian? Are we not commanded to live not for this world but for the Kingdom of God? The world has always been evil since Adam and Even betrayed God. Didn't the early Christians still have children and multiply for centuries while living under persecution and worshiping in the catacombs? Teach your children to love God and they will be okay. In Orthodoxy we have a concept of apatheia, a state of the mind where you have died to your passions- you're free from them and you're only a slave to Christ voluntarily, which is the only freedom we can have. This is how we're supposed to live, with salvation in mind. The bad news on your screens only affects that if you allow it.

I hate to break it to you but Imperial Russia was going downhill for a long time and then the Bolsheviks took over and that lasted for a lifetime. Stevdn Crowder deprived his wife of children because he was afraid of muslims. Well guess what, now he lives in a tyrannical state, so I guess theyll just never have kids now. If you try to time this you will never have kids because life isn't as easy to predict as you think. All we can assume is things will generally get worse, as the Book of Revelation tells us, but that's okay when you consider children adapt to their situations. Children living in warzones on average are probably enjoying life more than the average American child, because the former live for God and are immersed by loving families, while the latter has been abandoned to screens and the state. If you feel weak it's only because good times make weak men, weak men create hard times, and hard times make strong men who make good times. Your children will probably be stronger than you and will become saints. Same with my future children, God willing.
Excellent post.
 
I know this is obviously something that is in His hands and also discussion between my husband and I…but I was just looking for thoughts/discussion and maybe Biblical scripture/books I can read about family planning.

Currently I have two young children (one infant), my husband claims he doesn’t want any more (he said that after the first and changed his mind a year later) because of bringing the kids into THIS world and he thinks he’s too old (early 40s). Part of me agrees that it might be a really tough time for them to be alive especially if something were to happen to us adults and the other part of me feels like since we already have 2, why not give them more support and also more hope for the future generations (unless we’re really in the End Times)? I’m in my early 30s so I have some time and God has so far blessed me with good fertility so it seems like this is something I should do if husband is on board.

Is it best to not bring it up to my husband and just rely on God?

Are any other prospective parents having these thoughts too?
You should sell your husband on it.
Suggest to him that the greatest gift you can give your child is siblings. The more kids the merrier. Plant a kid in every entrance of your home w/ a 22 & you've got yourself an impenetrable fortress. Also, no will love you more than your family. And if you have a big family that's an automatic loving community. Just imagine what wonderful people they'll grow up to be and the things they'll accomplish.
 

infowarrior1

Hummingbird
IVF and surrogacy separate conception from the marital act of intimacy (love-making) and the physical joining of two into one, which is God’s design. Once we remove that, the “creation” of a child becomes the means to an end, not a secondary blessing of marital intimacy. Children are a gift from God not a product that we “make” or “get” from someone else.

We live in a world where people aren’t (morally) told “no” very often and have a “if it feels good, do it” mindset. People go to great lengths to limit any kind of emotional pain and suffering, and will do all kinds of mental gymnastics to rationalize their behaviors for limiting that pain.
The fallacy of which ignores that our reward system can get hijacked by drugs and sin.

Therefore that which is intended to reward good beneficial behaviors reward self-destructive and sinful behaviors instead.
 

infowarrior1

Hummingbird
Daycare is really bad for many children. This goes into many studies on the daycare generation:

This is also one of the many origins of modern day SJWs and other assorted modern freaks that city folk are forced to experience. And also the origin of so many mental disorders nowadays.

This article also goes extensively to many negative consequences of daycare:

These days they call Daycare "Childcare". Basically falsely making Daycare and Childcare by mothers themselves as being the same.

So when Government Officials talk about Childcare. They are actually talking about Daycare.

Brometheus also cites this study:

Brometheus is a Catholic Husband and Father.
 
Top