Printable View
http://www.fox17online.com/news/fox1...,1456142.story
Surrogate Battle: Local Couple Loses Twins to Birth Mother
Amy and Scott Kehoe say their twins wouldn't be here today if it weren't for them. Tonight, they're speaking out for the first time about how they lost custody of them to the birth mother and the ordeal they've gone through.
Full story at link. Want to get others thoughts before I put mine in.
I have never carried a baby before. But I think the Kehoe's should have got to keep those babies. They are their babies even if they aren't biological. The surrogate mother wouldn't have had them if it weren't for the Kehoe's. And she knew going into this that the babies would not be hers. I don't agree with the law that goes with the birth mother. Especially in this case that she was only the oven. I know mothers get emotionally attached to the baby when they carry it. But as I stated, the surrogate knew this going into it. And she's been a surrogate before.
The woman's "mental issues" shouldn't have anything to do with it. She even got a letter from a medical professional saying she could handle it.
I am so sad for that couple and the babies.
Somebody else watched Dr Phil today besides me.:D I didn't like the
surrogate mom, I think she looked for some fault in the adoptive mom
just to keep the babies for herself. IMO.
Unfortunately, it's a chance they took, and then lost. It doesn't seem fair, but I certainly hope they were aware that something like this could happen when they entered into the deal.
It appears that the law is on the side of the birth mother. I'm not saying if I agree or disagree, but it's a sad story that other couples have gone thru too. If I were childless and wanting a child in my younger day, I would have adopted, or just done without. I couldn't go thru that kind of heartbreak.
I'm wondering why they didn't/couldn't use their own egg and sperm - then they would be the biological parents.
They had tried invetro for 8 years. So something must have been wrong with their eggs and sperm. What I would like to know is how the surrogate could accept all their money for the things the babies needed and for the medical expenses, maternity clothes and so on and yet still keep the babies and not compensate the adoptive parents at all.
I feel so bad for the adoptive parents. I side totally with how Dr. Phil viewed this.
From the NY Times -
I worked with Dr. Ayers when he was a Med Student.Quote:
Under Michigan’s law, commercial surrogacy is punishable by five years in prison and a $50,000 fine. Ms. Baker said she did not carry the children for money and was reimbursed only for actual expenses like doctor’s appointments. Neither she nor the Kehoes have disclosed exactly how much that was.
Ms. Baker said she was the one who recommended Dr. Jonathan Ayers of IVF Michigan for fertility services. Dr. Ayers was involved in her two previous surrogate pregnancies.
http://drphil.com/shows/show/1397
For those who have not seen Dr. Phil show on this above is the link.
I read and watched much of what was on that link...is the couple who hoped to adopt the twins going to go to court?
If surrogacy is not supported in Michigan, they can't go that way...but they can apply to adopt, I would think.
Just really really sad. :(
They fought it in the courts till they ran out of money. So they can't apply to adopt right now and can't fight it any longer either. They lost everything.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Catty1
I haven't watched the video as yet - do they say WHY they couldn't use his sperm with a donor egg, or her egg with donor sperm? Then one of them would have been the biological parent and this would not have happened.Quote:
“We are stopping the fight to get our babies back,” Ms. Kehoe wrote in an e-mail message. “The reason is because of the slow court system, and because of the terrible Michigan laws. JUSTICE DOES NOT PREVAIL in this case due to Michigan laws.”
Ms. Kehoe still has hope, though. It is stored in a tank of liquid nitrogen at IVF Michigan. The tank contains 20 frozen embryos made from the eggs and sperm she bought.
If they had thoroughly researched the terrible Michigan laws before beginning the process, perhaps none of this would have happened.
State by state surrogacy laws.
I can't judge what the circustances really are in this case. To me it seems as though the surrogate mom used the mental illness issue as a weapon to keep the babies. If everyone with a mental illness was prevented from having children there might not be a next generation to worry about.
Adopting a child is very hard today, especially if one wants a baby. But that's the road I would have chosen had I been in the Kehoe's position. The risk with surrogacy is just too great.
I don't think anyone will ever know the real story behind this issue no matter what is printed or said.
I feel very sad for the poor couple whe were misled by this woman.
There's a couple of pre grown kids in AZ that are available and what is wrong with a kid from another country?:confused:
nobody said there was anything wrong with getting a baby from another country or adoption. They just chose to not do that option. They wanted to try surrogacy. It is a choice, not a put down to other avenues.
The real, biological parents of these twins are an egg from a pre-med student at the University of Michigan and a sperm from a California Cryobank, an athletic male with a 4.0 high school GPA.
Wonder how they feel about this - if they even know, which is doubtful. They both got $$$ for their donations and most likely never gave it another moments thought.
Quote:
Originally Posted by NicoleLJ
My solution was to take the kids from the other thread and have them get with this family.
No judgement about who, what or why they were looking for someone else to have their kids.
I never trust shows like Dr. Phil to tell the whole truth of the story, so am not going to proffer an opinion on this one, as the shows always seems to pick someone's "side" and slant things a particular way.
Fascinating...I have offered to surrogate for a gay couple I'm friends with, so articles about surrogacy always catch my eye. The state by state surrogacy laws were a great find, so thank you Grace for posting those.
I don't know what to think of the situation in the article...How sad for EVERYONE.
What a great friend. I think you would be a good candidate to do this you have mentioned you don't want children but to be willing to do this for others is very giving.Quote:
Originally Posted by snakemama
Maybe they could just adopt a pet or a child from another country or a special needs child. All need just as much love.
Why do people still have this great need to pass down their genes? It's a very old fashioned way of thinking, not like you are going to rule a country or anything because you were the first born.
Ann Landers' famous "The Childless Couple"
There is nothing sadder than a childless couple. It breaks my heart to see them relaxing around swimming pools in Florida, sitting all suntanned and miserable on the decks of their boats -- trotting off to Europe like lonesome fools. It's an empty life. Nothing but money to spend, more time to enjoy and a whole lot less to worry about.
The poor childless couple are so wrapped up in themselves, you have to feel sorry for them. They don't fight over the child's discipline, don't blame each other for the child's most obnoxious characteristics, and they miss all the fun of doing without for the child's sake. They just go along, doing whatever they want, buying what they want and liking each other. It's a pretty pathetic picture.
Everyone should have children. No one should be allowed to escape the wonderful experience that accompanies each stage in the development of the young -- the happy memories of sleepless nights, coughing spells, tantrums, diaper rash, debts, "dipso" baby sitters, saturated mattresses, emergencies and never-ending crises.
How dismal is the peaceful home without the constant childish problems that make a well-rounded life and an early breakdown; the tender, thoughtful discussions when the report card reveals the progeny to be one step below a moron; the end-of-the-day reunions with all the joyful happenings recited like well-placed blows to the temples.
Children are worth it. Every moment of anxiety, every sacrifice, every complete collapse pays off as a fine, sturdy adolescent is reached. The feeling of reward the first time you took the boy hunting -- he didn't mean to shoot you, the lad was excited. Remember how he cried? How sorry he was? And how much better you felt after the blood transfusion? These are the times a man with a growing son treasures -- memories that are captured forever in the heart and the limp.
Think back to the night of romantic adventure when your budding daughter eloped with the village idiot. What childless couple ever shared in the stark realism of that drama? Aren't you a better man for having lived richly, fully, acquiring that tic in your left eye? Could a woman without children touch the strength and heroism of your wife as she tried to fling herself out of the bedroom window?
The childless couple live in a vacuum. They fill their lonely days with golf, vacation trips, dinner dates, civic affairs, tranquility, leisure and entertainment. There is a terrifying emptiness without children, but the childless couple are too comfortable to know it.
You just have to look at them to see what the years have done: He looks boyish, unlined and rested; she's slim, well-groomed and youthful. It isn't natural. If they had had kids, they'd look like the rest of us -- worn out, wrinkled and exhausted.
Lizbud,
I watched Dr. Phil and I thought they said those babies had no genetic link to any of them. Correct me if I'm wrong. I also agree about the surrogate's attitude. But, possession is 9/10's of the law. Personally, I think they should ALL be in counseling for a very long time. Not only that, but according to MI law, surrogacy is illegal in that State. So, who's guilty? Certainly not those two beautiful twins who didn't ask to be in the middle of this mess.
I also think the "parents to be" should've had a lawyer present. Something so sensitive as surrogacy needs fine tuning and alot more than just having a baby and handing it over. The "i's" need dotting and the "tees" need crossing.
If I still had my plumbing, I'd gladly be a surrogate for someone in need. But because of my past medical history, no one would touch me. Fine with me. I can't stand screaming, obnoxious children anyway.
Honestly, I can't understand what the couple was trying to do.
I understand their heartbreak, completely, when they were unable to have a child of their own. I understand their desire to have a child to raise. What I don't understand is...what is the benefit of going to a surrogate?
Using the sperm of an unrelated man, the egg of an unrelated woman, and the womb of an unrelated woman, this couple had two children with 3 different parents, all meant to be 'unknown' to them, and were expecting to raise the children in their family...giving the children two more parents. 5. The children are unrelated to them in every shape and form, so it is nothing more than a very complicated way of seeking adoption. With so many orphans in this world, so many children and babies who don't have parents and NEED a loving home, I would've gone with the route of adoption if I were in their shoes.
I have been through pregnancy and childbirth. I have experienced seeing my child on ultrasounds, feeling him kick and squirm, and yes, those feelings truly bond a mother to the child. For the surrogate, I cannot imagine that she wouldn't have had those feelings. After all that, then going through the pain of childbirth, and seeing those beautiful children that she carried for 9 months for the first time, I cannot imagine how she would want to give them to someone else. It doesn't stop there. Once you deliver a child, your breats fill with milk...a constant reminder that you are the baby's mother...you are the one who is meant to feed him.
I guess at the end of the day, I realize they had an agreement and that's what they are fighting for, but I feel it was an agreement made without thorough thinking, and with this many people involved in the birth of the children, heartbreak was bound to happen.
When mankind diverts from the natural order of life and tries to do things the way they are not meant to be, problems will result. I hurt for the twins more than anyone else, precious, innocent babies, born into such a big mess.
I wonder if the surrogate would've given the baby up if there was only one. Something to ponder.
If they want kids so bad, why don't they go adopt the two kids the mother no longer wanted? Seems like a win/win situation to me.
To clarify mental illness...I suffer from depression, ADD, PTSD, anxiety and a hearing loss in my right ear. I've got a kid. Of course I wasn't diagnosed till much later. But I do believe that couples that enter into this sort of thing both need lawyers, and they need to be counseled in the event this happens again. And believe me, it will.
They need to really fine tune the laws on surrogacy, IMO.
Just wanted to remind everyone, the surrogate mother has been a surrogate twice before. This wasn't her first time. She also has 4 children of her own.
If she already has four she doesn't need two more.