Jezebel 
Enter your username and password.
New York, 7:26 AM
Tue Dec 22
55 posts in the last 24 hours
Tip your editors:
Editor-in-Chief:
Anna Holmes
| Twitter
Deputy Editor:
Dodai Stewart
| Twitter
Senior Contributing Editor:
Tracie Egan Morrissey
| Twitter
Contributing Editors:
Anna North
| Twitter
Sadie Stein
| Twitter
Reporter:
Irin Carmon
| Twitter
Editorial Assistant:
Margaret Hartmann
| Twitter
Contributors:
Rich Juzwiak
Email | Twitter
Latoya Peterson
Email
Jenna Sauers
Lizzie Skurnick
Interns:
Katy Kelleher
Twitter
Weekends/Commenter Moderator:
Hortense
| Twitter
Original material is licensed under a Creative Commons License permitting non-commercial sharing with attribution.
12/15/09
The Kehoes may not have physically experienced the pregnancy like Laschell Baker did, but mentally, emotionally, they shared the excitements and the anxieties. When the twins were born, and then they brought them home, their dream of being parents was finally realized. It was cruelly taken away from them because someone else decided that they were unfit to raise the children that would not exist were it not for them based on what? A mental disorder that's been controlled for the past eight years?
I am adopted, and so is my little brother; we have no genetic ties to our parents, or to each other. I realise that adoption is a separate issue from surrogacy, but some of the same ethical and moral questions arise.
For example, the discussions here about how the Kehoes and other hope-to-be parents essentially "bought" their children. In the end, does it really matter? Are they really any less of a family? Are their relationships less genuine or loving?
Assuming that other methods were not successful in providing the couple with children, they chose surrogacy. Maybe it was the only option left to them. If anything, it shows that the Kehoes are dedicated to having children, and have gone through a lot to be parents. Speaking from my own experience, knowing that my parents went through so much to bring our family together has always made me feel special, and reminded me that I'm loved and wanted.
Biological bonds, mother-child, are something I don't know about so I can't speak to Ms. Baker's side in all of this, but I do know that it's possible to grow up happy and healthy without them. Family doesn't need to be about genetics. Family is what you make it. These twins need to be with the people who will provide them with the love and support they deserve. It's ridiculous that the people who claim to have their best interests at heart are the ones creating the discord and conflict. For their sake I hope this is settled - permanently and peacefully - soon.
12/15/09
Oh right, only women raise children. He probably just sits on the couch and drinks beer and doesn't care about his kids or his wife's mental health. Clearly, the Kehoe's extraordinary efforts to have children indicate he has absolutely no interest in participating in their upbringing.
/sarcasm
12/14/09
Baker says if she'd known about Mrs. Kehoe's history beforehand she wouldn't have agreed to surrogacy. So from a contractual standpoint (if surrogate contracts were enforceable in Michigan) you might have a problem of misrepresentation. And from just a human standpoint, I'm uncomfortable with setting a precedent that surrogates must hand the children over to the contracting parents no matter what.
I feel terrible for the Kehoes. And I really respect them for their decision to move on -- it's probably what's best for the children at this point, and that's a noble act. But I don't necessarily see Baker as a villain here. She was expected to hand off children she'd carried to term, children she'd nourished and cared for, even though she felt betrayed by the people to whom she was expected to give those children. I might disagree with her reasons for rejecting the Kehoes as parents, but I just can't imagine forcing her to pass of the kids if she wouldn't have agreed to surrogacy with them in the first place, knowing what she knows now.
12/15/09
12/15/09
I'm not saying what Baker did was right. But in my mind, there is little difference between forcing Baker to give the children to the Kehoes after finding out things that would have prevented her from surrogating at all, and forcing her to be a surrogate. Baker became a surrogate under false pretenses. That, to me, makes it unclear whether the twins "belong" to the Kehoes or Baker.
12/15/09
12/14/09
12/14/09
"What if she doesn't take her medication" is such a cop-out. If Mrs. Kehoe developed a mental illness ten years down the road, would the surrogate take them back? I can't believe Michigan doesn't have laws pertaining to this eventuality.
12/14/09
12/14/09
And I DO think we should take people at face value when they say they're taking their meds - I DO. I take mine, right? And yet people always say, "oh well I can't take it at face value..." Even when I'm more stable than most of my friends without mental illnesses because I have to be so super careful about what I eat, how much I sleep, etc. that I can't just go off the deep end like them.
The kicker to my story is that the woman my mother hand-picked for my son ended up being bipolar as hell, doesn't take her meds, and my mother is constantly complaining to me about how irrational and irratic she is.
So I don't know why you put "mental illness stigma" in quotes as if it never happens, or as if it's a problem that is somehow blown out of proportion. She said she didn't give the baby to them because of the wife's mental disorder. Period. It doesn't get more cut and dried than that.
12/14/09
12/14/09
Okay, look at it like this: Schizophrenia is not a woman's fault. Nor is being in an abusive relationship. Yet there are certain states where having been to the hospital for domestic violence or rape can render you uninsurable, due to a pre-existing condition. Sure, you're more at risk for needing health insurance if you've had an abusive partner, or you're a rape victim. Does that mean you shouldn't get health insurance? Likewise, just because you HAVEN'T been in the hospital for domestic abuse or rape doesn't mean you won't ever be. Just because you HAVEN'T been hospitalized for a mental illness doesn't mean you won't ever be.
I view them as the same thing.
I also highly doubt her husband would have thought having a baby would be a good idea if she was on and off her meds.
12/14/09
Maybe she didn't want to adopt - she wanted an infant from birth without the hassle of domestic adoption? I don't think two adults would pour hundreds of thousands of dollars into this process (and before that, probably lots of IVF and other fertility drugs) if they doubted the wife's ability to care for her children.
And furthermore, there was a home check made by the government, and they passed. Does the surrogate really think she knows better? She way overstepped her bounds.
12/15/09
12/15/09
12/15/09
12/14/09
First of all (to me), saying that someone is "working on changing their life" implies that the things that are wrong are that person's fault. Also, her doctor has given a written statement saying that she is fit to parent. So I would say that she has already put a lot of work into changing her life. Also, yes, you are judging. You really, really are.
12/14/09
I've never had a baby so I can't pretend to understand Ms. Baker's hormonal/emotional/physical attachment to those twins so I won't pass comment about her decision to take the twins back. However, I find her use of false justifications infuriating. I would respect her statement more if she had just said: "look, judge me if you want but I really felt like this was the right thing to do and I know in my heart that I made the right decision". I think her need to justify her actions belies the fact that she is probably not sure that she did the right thing.
12/14/09
These children are probably bonding with the parents, and then they're yanked away. I mean, children imprint on the parents. And then when they go to the surrogates....it can't be good.
And, besides, what is this woman thinking - she might not take her medication? Like, what? This woman wouldn't have other people to help out if something happens?
And WHAT mental illness does she have that she may not take her medication?
12/14/09
It might not be fair, but I would probably have some concerns about handing over babies to a woman with a serious mental illness too. What's probably unspoken is that surrogates can really bond with the babies. It's possible the surrogate started out looking for a reason to renege.
12/14/09
It's a shame that our legal system can't handle a surplus of qualified parents who want to be part of a child's life better.
12/14/09
Also, the surromoms board indicates that she is now planning to adopt the children to a third couple, although that is not included in the NYT story.
12/14/09
12/14/09
12/14/09
12/14/09
12/14/09
The experience of pregnancy and childbirth are hard for me to interpret as a mere service, like developing film, too. A surrogate may be able to intellectualize that the baby is not "hers" but our bodies (including the parts of our brains that aren't doing the intellectualizing) are not. Everyone seems to understand that a woman giving up her child for adoption is making a great emotional effort, but surrogates, because they signed up to perform this service, are expected to be emotionally detached?
This is a case when our ethical (as well as biological) framework hasn't caught up with our technology yet, I think.
12/14/09
You're absolutely right: our technology has outpaced our own understanding of it, and that itself is pretty fucking scary.
ETA: I also wouldn't expect a surrogate to be emotionally detached, but I wouldn't consider that emotional attachment enough to warrant lifelong custody.
12/14/09
I'm just ribbing ya!
12/14/09
I'm not sure what exactly the Kehoe's would be referred to as in this case. Maybe something similar to adoptive parents....?
12/14/09
Think about it: is it logical to love a wrinkled pink thing who you just met and who just caused you hours of pain and discomfort and is now - quite unappreciatively - wailing blood murder? Oxytocin was nature's way of ensuring that prehistoric women didn't leave their babies to the wolves. In the 21st century, when children have taken on a cultural significance which has largely taken over Oxytocin's job, this chemical attachment seems to be causing some problems.
12/14/09
12/14/09
12/14/09
12/14/09
12/14/09
12/14/09
12/14/09
Regardless, surrogate mommy is a horrible person - how dare she take these children away from their parents! She's also inevitably going to make the kid's lives harder because as they grow up, and this goes on (because it probably will), they're going to know there's a conflict around/because of them. That's just a terrible thing to do to a child.
If Ms. Kehoe was a recovering alcoholic, would Baker congratulate her for staying sober for 8 years, or do the same thing she's doing now?
12/14/09
Besides, how on earth can Laschell Baker be the judge of whether or not a schizophrenic person, who seems to be working on making her disorder not an issue, be a good mother? How is that even her place? Her role here was carrying the children, and that does not make her the arbiter of who is a good mother, even if you have four kids of your own.
This is just so heartbreaking. I can't imagine being in that situation.
12/14/09
The courts' objections to surrogate contract usually goes like this - "but women can't give up their parental rights through contract - it's inconceivable!" That belief is rooted in the outdated notion that women just want to be mothers and the only way that a woman would ever contract away these rights is in situations of duress (i.e. no other way to make a living).
Perosnally, i think it's an insult to