"HELLOsweetAMERICA-nettes. WE areSOglad2C.allTHOSEperfectSMILES&HONESTeyesONthisSITE.
ITgives WE hope4aBETTERfuture4U&UrKIDDO'S.BEhones"
Sarah Jessica Parker's using a surrogate this time around -- would you?
Matthew Broderick and Sarah Jessica Parker just announced they're having twins -- actually their surrogate will be having their twins for them.
We want to know: If you could afford this luxury, would you let another woman have your babies for you?
We want to know: If you could afford this luxury, would you let another woman have your babies for you?
Tags: broderick, jessica, matthew, parker, sarah, surrogate, twins
Views: 20
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Jo Anna Guerra on -
I'd safely bet there's way more to the story than this being a "luxury" choice. The woman does not have the healthiest looking little frame, for instance. Perhaps her doctors have recommended against her carrying a baby -- let alone two -- to term. That being said, surrogacy is a totally legitimate option.
But would I do it for sheer vanity? I think not.
-
Permalink Reply by Carla Williams on -
I am an adoptive parent. There are so many children who need homes. When I realized that I could not get pregnant for the second time. We adopted an infant. Having said that I have no problem with people who use surrogates.
-
Permalink Reply by Laura on -
Yeah, I wonder what the whole story is, there. I am excited for them about having twins - I have two sets of twins and they're such a special blessing. Twins are awesome!
-
Permalink Reply by Debby on -
Since carrying my 3 boy left me with messed up kidneys I would have to depend on a surrogate to carry any more. However, my husband would have to go through a painful procedure just do that so it isn't really an option for me.
Adoption sometimes isn't an option due to legal mistakes in one's youth.
-
Permalink Reply by Queen of the Click on
-
I don't think it's because of luxury. SJP isn't that young any more and may be forced to do it this way.
-
Permalink Reply by Alethea Anderson on -
Me personally, no, as I am not having any more kids.
If I wanted more kids, and could not, I might consider it. But I'd also consider adoption at that point and weigh the two options.
I do question, is SJP unable to carry her own children, or is she just saving her girlish figure? If she is doing it because she has no other option then I fully agree with her decision. However if she is doing it because she 'can' then I find it selfish and centered...
Alethea Anderson
I work at home therefore I am!
-
Permalink Reply by Debra Dean Sepulveda on -
NO - this is precious time where you bond and feel every movement the baby makes from hiccups to feeling like a butterfly down to the last month where the baby rolls from side to side and you can watch and experience it together as parents.
It's a nesting time for the preparation and to adjust to the fact that you are both having this baby together!
Nothing is more beautiful than a pregnant woman! Your children grow up so fast I would not want to miss a minute of having that special time together - when the two of you are one!
"Mom" and "Grandmom"
-
Permalink Reply by millie Long on -
I am also an adoptive parent! We have always wanted to adopt even if I could have conceived. Our luck to conceive was never an option as years have gone by quickly. So we have adopted a beautiful baby girl from Utah. Well there might be more to this story. They could have had frozen embryos and Jessica's age came into play and she can't carry due to age. Her liner, fsh and estrogen levels my not be efficient enough to carry. So why loose good embryos! I'm sure if she could carry those twins she would. Well congrats to them both.
-
Permalink Reply by Youngor Kermee on -
No, I wouldnt because it takes away the experience. We all know kids say the darnest things, what if they grow up and ask oh mommy what was I like in yor tummy or did you eat a lot of crazy food when you were pregnat with me. How awkard will you feel trying to explain to your child that I'm your mom but somene else gaved birth to you, but you're not adopted.
-
Permalink Reply by Kate ~Mom to 2 Princesses~ on -
After I have another in 5 or so years we will more than likely adopt. I don't think I would ever do surrogacy. It just doesn't seem right that there are so many kids in this world who need homes and parents that to do it this way would in my eyes be selfish. I'd rather take in someone who may have lost their parents or who cannot be with them. To me that seems to be a wiser decision. But to each his own right?
-
Permalink Reply by Naureen Collins on -
As I had my tubes tied thirteen years ago, if I decided to have another child, I'd have to either adopt or use a surrogate. However, for me, to make that decision out of vanity rather than medical necessity is not something I could do. While I had horrible morning sickness and gained enough weight to become my own float in the parade, I still would not feel as connected to a child if I chose for someone else to carry it just because I didn't want to go through that experience again. It's akin to having a nanny raise your kids while you're off vacationing or whatever. They're your own kids! Raise 'em! Play with them! Love them!
-
Permalink Reply by Naureen Collins on
-
If she is still more concerned about having another child than she is about being healthy, the decision would still be self-centered. I'd rather get myself healthy for the family I already had than just have someone else carry my baby for me. As for the 'twins' part, they couldn't have known about the number of babies coming until after the implantation so that wouldn't have been a consideration anyway. I hope there's more to this than vanity, SJP is not that old...plenty of older women have had healthy babies. I would want to know the reason why they chose this path before judging their decision.
Jo Anna Guerra said:I'd safely bet there's way more to the story than this being a "luxury" choice. The woman does not have the healthiest looking little frame, for instance. Perhaps her doctors have recommended against her carrying a baby -- let alone two -- to term. That being said, surrogacy is a totally legitimate option.
But would I do it for sheer vanity? I think not.
Latest Activity
Toy van Nooijen zip2342EAholland posted a status"HIssSweetMUMSss, WE gueSss it'sEAssSIER2linkssSOMEstuffHERE ciaoMUJER'S"
Badge
© 2013 Created by Momlogic.
