Iman Khoshnaw

Cristof Teuscher
Life Unlimited
11, June 2014
An Ethical Approach to Surrogating
Many people in the world are unable to have children of their own and it may be
in wide ranges of situations. Some people cannot have children because they may be
barren and others may not have children because they have a sort of disease or unhealthy
conditions, which may affect their child. People may suggest that adopting a child would
be another option too, however, what if the family wants something of their own; of their
own genes. There is something called surrogating which is the process of another woman
carrying and gives birth to a baby to the person who wishes to have one. It is the process
of taking the sperm of the male and taking the egg of the female and implanting it into the
womans womb. In many religions, this is highly looked down upon. However, what if a
persons last option was to surrogate, what would happen and what is the most ethical
approach in a situation like this. In the case scenario, it is a whole different case, where
the carrier does not want to give the child back to the parents. For cases like these, one
may think who has the actual rights to have the child. The carrier who begins to have an
emotional attachment to the child or the parents who could not have children on their
own but wanted a child of their own so they surrogate. Making decisions to whom will
have what takes a hard process to come to a conclusion because we need to treat both
sides equally and continue from an ethical standpoint.
There are many ways to make a decision ethically and it only depends on how the
person views the situation and how they feel towards it also. According to the article,
Thinking Ethically: A Framework for Moral Decision Making by Manuel Velasquez, it
talks about the different approaches to make a decision ethically. In the case of Mr. X and
Ms. Y, the two most important approaches would be the Utilitarian Approach and the
Rights Approach. The Utilitarian Approach was introduced in the 19
th
century by Jeremy
Bentham and John Stuart Mill to help legislators figure out which laws were morally
best. The Utilitarian approach analyzes who will be affected with decisions or with the
actions made. It chooses which actions are made to produce the greatest benefits and the
least harm. Another approach that is applicable to this certain case would be the Rights
Approach. The Rights Approach began in the 18
th
century from Immanuel Kant who
focused on the individuals right to choose for her or himself. Other philosophers along
with Kant reached to a conclusion that people are different from others because they have
the dignity based on their ability to choose freely what they wish to do with their lives.
This approach had other rights that went along with free choice and they are: the right to
the truth, the right of privacy, the right not to be injured, and the right to what is agreed.
The case that I choose to do was case #2 which was about surrogacy and the man,
Mr. X is a rich man and a holocaust survivor that lost all of his family members and his
wife who has a disease cannot have or does not want to have a child. So their idea was to
call a woman, Ms. Y who is jobless and has two children of her own. A contracted that
was made by a lawyer that Ms. Y would bear and give birth to the child with Mr. Xs
sperm and she would not have any claims to the child once she gives birth. Ms. Y would
also receive $50,000 and Mr. X would adopt the child then. However, when Ms. Y gives
birth, she does not want to give the child up to Mr. X. This situation would mostly focus
on the right to what is agreed because this right states that we have a right to what has
been promised by those with whom we have freely entered into a contract or agreement.
Since Ms. Y has signed a contract saying that she would give the child after birth she has
no rights to have the child for her own. First, it was her decision to carry the child and she
did it because maybe she was poor and needed financial aid from someone. There is no
problem with her doing it, however, since she signed a contract, like the right says, she
has no power over the child. This may be because when the carrier was pregnant, she had
an emotional attachment to the child like any mother would have. Giving birth to the
child may have caused her to be even more attached to the baby and want to become that
babys mother. It can be in any case where the mother does not want to give her newborn
baby to the family. However, this situation would not be ethical because she had agreed
to give the baby to the family right after she gave birth. Ms. Y may have felt an emotional
attachment during her pregnancy to the unborn child. However, she could have thought
about all the consequences she would face such as being forced to give her child up
once it was born especially since she already knows what being pregnant would be like.
As much as the Right Approach states that the individual has the right to choose for his or
her decisions, Ms. Y does not have that right no longer because she already made her
decision to give the child back to Mr. X as an adoption and since she signed a contract,
she cannot regret her decisions. Mr. X on the other hand, does have the right to surrogate
and he does have the right to adopt his own child because he did sign the contact and he
also paid Ms. Y for the trouble she had to go through of carrying a child for nine months
and for giving birth to a child.
For the Utilitarian Approach the only action that would be available to take would
give the child back to Mr. Y. However, since Ms. X is may be emotionally attached to the
baby, she may be affected by Mr. Y adopting the child. Vice versa, this is Mr. Ys child
and if he does not get the rights to have the child, he would be affected because after a
long period of time he wants a child and to lose that opportunity, it would affect him
especially since he was also a holocaust survivor. For the Utilitarian Approach the only
ethical decision with the least harm that can do for others, would be Mr. Y to adopt the
child and Ms. X to be able to see the child whenever it is possible to do so. However,
seeing the child has its own sets of rules because the Ms. X has had no relationship with
Mr. Y and his wifes family, therefore she cannot act to the child as if she is the childs
mother. During visitation, she cannot interfere with the childs life as a mother and she
cannot also interfere with the decisions being made within the family. This child was
planned only for Mr. Y and his wife and not with Ms. X therefore, he has every right to
every decision that he wishes to make.
To conclude, Mr. Y should be able to adopt the child during the court case
because he did in a professional way where he had a contract with the carrier, out of
generosity, paid her for the pain that she had to go through in order to give birth to his
child. Mr. Y and Ms. X can come with a conclusion as to how often Ms. X can see the
child when she wishes to since she may have had an emotional attachment towards the
child. Through the two approaches to make a moral decision as to who has the right to
what, one can see that Mr. Y has the rights to adopt his own child and it would be unjust
if they did not rule in that case for him to have the child. Ms. X got paid and on top of
that to have the child would be an unjust ruling and therefore, the system of approaches
would fail in that case. After all, everyone needs to know what consequences they must
face with every decision they make.