Surrogacy

cyantist

There is nothing wrong with wanting a biological child. It’s the norm for straight couples and no one ever questions why they don’t want to adopt, and although it’s obviously not as easy for a gay couple, it doesn’t mean they don’t have the same wishes. But there is something that is bothering me and that is referring to either your own children or adopted children. Adopted children are your own. You go to court and then they are legally yours. As a gay couple, only one parent can be biologically related to the child. Does that mean the child wouldn’t the other person’s own child?

meritaten wrote: »

Sorry - but this emphasis on your 'yearning for our OWN child' is worrying me. most of your posts are about 'surrogacy' and your OWN child. are you sure you are right for fostering? because you could have a foster child long term and I would worry that if a natural child came along, the foster child may well be second best.

They would not let a foster placement continue once you bring a biological child into the equation. They would find another home for the foster child. I don’t think wanting to have a child of your own (whether biological or adopted) is a reason not to foster in the meantime. The op is not in a position to be having their own family yet, and until they do they could be making a difference in several children’s lives and that is amazing. They need all sorts of foster carers and if op and partner say they don’t want long term placements then that will be taken into account.

Op, we have no idea what your earnings are, but if you had 2 foster children you’d be picking up over 3k a month, plus whatever you earn. You may well not have two children throughout the year, so overall earnings may be significantly lower and obviously you’ll have expenses to cover with having the children, but fostering is designed to give you a decent income as well as covering expenses so you will hopefully be able to save some of that and there may be some changes in lifestyle once you have foster children that mean you’re spending less on your social life/holidays etc.

heuchera

matt.warman83 wrote: »

Fostering aside we have always wanted out own children (not opposed to adoption but would love our own (call us selfish if you will)

cyantist wrote: »

There is nothing wrong with wanting a biological child. It’s the norm for straight couples and no one ever questions why they don’t want to adopt, and although it’s obviously not as easy for a gay couple, it doesn’t mean they don’t have the same wishes. But there is something that is bothering me and that is referring to either your own children or adopted children. Adopted children are your own. You go to court and then they are legally yours. As a gay couple, only one parent can be biologically related to the child. Does that mean the child wouldn’t the other person’s own child?

It would be good if the OP could elaborate a bit more on this.. a gay couple are obviously not going to produce a child :rotfl:

sheramber

heuchera wrote: »

It would be good if the OP could elaborate a bit more on this.. a gay couple are obviously not going to produce a child :rotfl:

Never heard of artificial insemination.

No different for a gay couple than for a heterosexual couple who are unable to have children.

tea_lover

heuchera wrote: »

It would be good if the OP could elaborate a bit more on this.. a gay couple are obviously not going to produce a child :rotfl:

What information could you possibly need? For starters, what they need the money for isn't even relevant to saving/income boosting tips. Secondly, surely most people have an idea of at least the basics of IVF using donor eggs.

heuchera

sheramber wrote: »

Never heard of artificial insemination.

No different for a gay couple than for a heterosexual couple who are unable to have children.

So it's no different for two men to try and procreate than it is for a man and a woman :think:

The point the poster above me was making was that the child would only be biologically one of theirs. For the other partner it would not be genetically theirs.

It's a valid point to raise, because it's important to the OP that the child is biologically theirs, presumably meaning their and their partner's.

LilElvis

heuchera wrote: »

So it's no different for two men to try and procreate than it is for a man and a woman :think:

The point the poster above me was making was that the child would only be biologically one of theirs. For the other partner it would not be genetically theirs.

It's a valid point to raise, because it's important to the OP that the child is biologically theirs, presumably meaning their and their partner's.

The OP didn't say "biological" child but "own" child, one that is theirs from conception onwards. I would guess that they are already aware that only one of them will be genetically related to the child.

matt.warman83

LilElvis wrote: »

The OP didn't say "biological" child but "own" child, one that is theirs from conception onwards. I would guess that they are already aware that only one of them will be genetically related to the child.

Thank you, got it in one!:T:T
I do have to laugh because we have gone so far off topic! From asking about making extra money to defending our life choices!:rotfl:
Thanks all that have commented something useful!

matt.warman83

heuchera wrote: »

It would be good if the OP could elaborate a bit more on this.. a gay couple are obviously not going to produce a child :rotfl:

Thats pretty obvious to be fair unless my OH isn't telling me something!
It's not about biology for us, more that we have the same journey any heterosexual couple have when they fall pregnant.(we would eventually do surrogacy twice with the same surrogate so they would be half siblings by blood)
Biology does play a small part but out of all the reasons we want to do surrogacy, its the least important thing.

Jagraf

You sound as if you have enough love to give between you wherever a child originates from ! Lots of luck to you - you could make some extra money writing a book about your journey maybe .

heuchera

matt.warman83 wrote: »

Thank you, got it in one!:T:T
I do have to laugh because we have gone so far off topic! From asking about making extra money to defending our life choices!:rotfl:
Thanks all that have commented something useful!

The most important thing in all of this is the child. Not the lifestyle choices of the "parents".

But if you want something useful and finance-related to mull over, you might want to look at this, if you haven't seen it already
http://www.hfea.gov.uk/1424.html

The rights of the surrogate

You should bear in mind that the surrogate has the legal right to keep the child, even if it is not genetically related to her.

Surrogacy arrangements are not legally enforceable, even if a contract has been signed and the expenses of the surrogate have been paid.

The surrogate will be the legal mother of the child unless or until parenthood is transferred to the intended mother through a parental order or adoption after the birth of the child. This is because, in law, the woman who gives birth is always treated as the mother.

I presume then, you and your partner are female?