Adoption and surrogacy Week 23 Sociology of Human Reproduction

Recap Considered at the social construction of families and motherhood Considered the concepts of ‘good motherhood’ and ‘un/respectable’ users of contraception Considered the debates around ARTs and prenatal screening and disability

Outline Examine the history of adoption and its relationship to the ‘family’ Examine the context of adoption today Examine the meanings of surrogacy

Early adoption The transferring of children between families has a long history Some due to economic factors, others due to high rates of mortality The types of adoption have changed in relation to understanding about ‘family’ and inheritance

Early adoption Infertile couples in Ancient Greece and Rome would adopt ‘heirs’ Europe in the middle–ages rejected adopting ‘heirs’, but wealthier families would ‘take-in’ children to use as servants or labourers Families would also care for orphaned relatives Most of these arrangements were made through informal ties

Early adoption In the 19th century, these informal arrangements began to be codified in law Also saw rise in urban orphans with no family or connections Foundling hospitals and workhouses began to be overwhelmed

19th Century dilemma Increase in the number of children needing homes Decline in adoption as a solution The available children were not of the right ‘stock’ and therefore unsuitable for ‘good’ middle-class homes

What do these changes in adoption tell as about different understandings of ‘family’?

20th century changes During the 20th increasing numbers of children were born outside marriage The ideal of the nuclear family meant that infertility was a social problem As ideas of ‘bad blood’ declined adoption became to be seen as the solution

20th century changes 1960s proved to be the peak of adoption in the UK and US Developments in contraceptive technologies reduced numbers of pregnancies Declining social stigma of unwed mothers led to a sharp decline in children available for adoption

20th century changes Also during this time, potential parents began to be the subject of scrutiny ‘Good’ parents needed to conform to middle-class ideals (if not income) Single, cohabiting, gay and lesbian potential parents have only recently been considered.

UK adoption today In the UK today there are 4 main areas of adoption: Adoption of step-children Babies and children with disabilities Children who have been removed from their families Babies and young children from overseas

Overseas adoption Adoption of babies and/or young children from overseas has grown significantly Large numbers of children are living in desperate poverty and/or unsuitable orphanages Adoption by western parents may give children access to better health, housing and education

Buying babies? Opponents of overseas adoption understand it as ‘buying babies’ Prices reflect the perceived desirability Money should be invested in improving conditions for all children The trade exists because of the desperate poverty created by the west.

Is overseas adoption a benevolent move uniting the desperate-to-be parents with children in need? Or is it a form of exploitation whereby the rich developed world benefits from the poverty of the developing nations?

Surrogacy Like adoption, surrogacy has a long history but rarely openly discussed During late 20th century surrogacy became a public matter through custody cases Began to be linked to the rise of ARTs

Types of surrogacy Traditional Surrogacy Gestational Surrogacy The mother is both a biological parent and the carrying mother. Gestational Surrogacy The carrying mother is not biologically related to the foetus Altruistic surrogacy The surrogacy as a kind gesture Commercial surrogacy A contract for money (technically illegal in the UK)

Why do we call women who have children for other people ‘surrogate mothers’? What does this name tell you about their status?

Baby M In 1986, Mary Beth Whitehead gave birth to Sara following artificial insemination She had agreed a contract with William Stern $10,000 plus medical expenses Mary Beth changed her mind, and told Stern he could keep his money. At 5 weeks old a court ordered her to give up Sara to William and Elizabeth Stern Sara became Melissa

Baby M The Judge decided that the case was a custody case, rather than a surrogacy case. William Stern had a right to the baby as a biological father. Mary Beth was deemed an unfit mother her other children were never taken into care. Later the court of appeal overruled this decision, reinstating Mary Beth as the baby's legal mother But decided it was in Melissa’s best interest to say with the Sterns

Baby Johnson In 1990, Anna Johnson, a Black mother, gave birth to a white baby boy following gestational surrogacy contract Anna argued that had she bonded with the foetus and that the Calverts had breached the surrogacy contract. In court, Anna too was portrayed as an unfit mother. It was also claimed in court, that Anna wanted to keep the baby because it was white. The court found that the intention to become pregnant and the genetic link were the most important issues.

What do you think about the decisions in these 2 cases? What should be thought about when deciding the outcome?

Class and racial politics Both cases they were poor women with other children to support Life with them was judged as undesirable in contrast to the middle-class homes They were not 'unfit' mothers, but just not good enough given the alternatives white, middle-class parenthood

Class and racial politics Despite poverty, having a child for money meant they were ‘unnatural’ mothers Yet the need to ‘buy’ and parent a genetically-related child was 'natural'. So ideas about ‘good motherhood’ are deemed to be more important than a biological relationship

Surrogacy in the UK In the UK, commercial surrogacy is outlawed. It is a crime to arrange or advertise a surrogacy contract Birth mother is the legal mother, until she relinquishes that role Transfer arrangements to move parental responsibility from a surrogate mother to commissioning parents are possible Parental Orders (Human Fertilisation and Embryology) Regulations 1994

Surrogacy in the US Growing industry connected to ARTs Runs alongside trade in human eggs Prices linked to type of surrogacy and ‘desirability’ of the woman College educated get more money

Dilemmas of surrogacy Many surrogate mothers feel a sense of achievement Some women go through the surrogate process time and time again They also benefit from the money and/or expenses They assist people to have a child of their own

Dilemmas of surrogacy Surrogates take on the health risks associated with ARTs and/or pregnancy Exploitation of poor women by the rich Few surrogates would exist without the financial incentive Growing international trade much less regulated than adoption

Summary Adoption has changed over time in relation to ideas about hereditary and ‘good’ families Adoption and Surrogacy can be understood as benevolent or exploitative practices The ‘market’ in children in rapidly expanding