Jezebel 
Enter your username and password.
New York, 3:09 AM
Tue Nov 10
67 posts in the last 24 hours
Tip your editors:
tips@jezebel.com
Editor-in-Chief:
Anna Holmes
Email | Twitter
Deputy Editor:
Dodai Stewart
Email | Twitter
Senior Contributing Editor:
Tracie Egan
Email | Twitter
Contributing Editors:
Anna North
Email | Twitter
Sadie Stein
Email | Twitter
Reporter:
Irin Carmon
Email
Editorial Assistant:
Margaret Hartmann
Email | Twitter
Contributors:
Jenna Sauers
Email
Rich Juzwiak
Email | Twitter
Lizzie Skurnick
Email
Interns:
Katy Kelleher
Twitter
Original material is licensed under a Creative Commons License permitting non-commercial sharing with attribution.
09/27/09
We're talking about one woman, not a large social pattern. The US birth rate is at replacement level. In fact, the only reason it is that high is because new immigrant groups are having slightly more children than the native born. Replacement rate population is not considered a problem. Lower rates are not better because then you end up with an uneven population- lots of people in nursing homes and no one to run the trains. Immigration can partly solve this problem, but a below replacement level population in developed countries doesn't fix the actual population problem. The real population problem is in developing countries where fertility hasn't declined but medical advances mean more children are surviving into adulthood even with shitty health care. There isn't enough land for everyone and not everyone wants to immigrate to Germany (where they need children).
The environmental impact is also not more kids = bad. A family uses fewer resources per person than those people would use if they were individuals living on there own. As much as we have huge problems with pollution and dwindling resources, the answer isn't for everyone to stop having babies in the developed world. That just leads to the no one to run the trains problem. We need better use of our resources, smarter immigration policies and increased female empowerment (which leads to a by-choice reduction in family size).
Worldwide the population growth rate is actually declining from a 2% yearly increase in 1965 to a 1.2% increase today. Zero growth would be better, but this one woman isn't part of that issue.
This woman isn't the face of overpopulation, this woman is exactly who should be having children- a woman who wants children, can provide for them and is willing to put the needs of others above her own. (I am in no way saying that poor woman shouldn't reproduce, but there are women out there who don't want more children and know they can't provide for them, but cannot access bc for a whole bunch of reasons).
09/27/09
09/27/09
09/26/09
My heart breaks for this woman and her family. She went through an entire pregancy and has no baby. Her milk has come in and she has no baby. She has to heal from a C-section and no baby. She has all those homonal changes and no baby.
I can't believe how judgmental some people are here. I hope none of you ever have to go through such a loss. This woman is incredibly strong. She should be commended for providing such a gift to perfect strangers.
09/26/09
Maybe I'm oversensitive from hearing it so often, but it screams of "an adopted child is never your own"
09/26/09
09/26/09
09/26/09
09/26/09
09/26/09
09/26/09
Adoption is a beautiful thing, this circumstance isn't the same.
09/26/09
09/26/09
09/26/09
09/26/09
09/26/09
09/26/09
Now had that child been given up for adoption and now a bio family wanted the child back X years later I would be on here screaming about the unfairness of tearing a child from a loving family that raised and wanted them.
09/26/09
09/26/09
09/26/09
09/26/09
But anyone who says to you that an adopted child is not the same as a bio child (assuming you are adopted and people have said this sort of thing)? They're idiots. That's bullshit.
09/26/09
But, maybe my belief in parental love is too strong
09/26/09
09/26/09
Did the article mention if she was compensated or not?
09/26/09
09/26/09
I haven't heard anything about compensation, but I hope someone stepped in to take care of the medical bills. If the bio parents pay, it becomes much more like a traditional surrogacy.
09/26/09
09/26/09
09/26/09
09/26/09
I don't think a case exactly like this has ever been tried, but under the cases closest, there's no way she could have kept the baby.
09/26/09
"If the individuals who have been identified as the genetic parents have not relinquished or waived their rights to assume the legal status of natural parents, they shall be considered the natural and legal parents of that child. Belsito v. Clark (1994), 67 Ohio Misc. 2d 54, 6, 644 N.E.2d 760. Under this test, both genetics and birth are used in determining parentage. However, the birth test becomes subordinate and secondary to the genetics test."
[www.surrogacy.com]
09/26/09
This is a HUGE STRETCH, but if I was impregnated, it's biologically "part" someone else's. That doesn't mean they have any say over what goes on with the fetus pre or post birth, right?
To make the Elle Woods argument (hah), a sperm donor is a biological contributor, but they don't have any say (though I'm pretty sure they have contracts too, yeah?).
09/26/09
Really, if it's not a surrogacy, couldn't the bio parents sue her for kidnapping? Custodial interference? If Ohio law recognizes genetic parentage before birth parentage as a matter of law, isn't she keeping someone else's child?
I'm not sure the case would come to down surrogacy and presence or absence of a contract so much as what the law in the state of Ohio recognizes as legal parentage.
It would definitely make for very a very interesting court case, and one I'd almost like to see happen. I'm glad these parents were able to come to an amicable resolution, but this will happen again, and sooner or later there's going to be a conflict.
09/26/09
I agree that I would LOVE to see a case like this pan out. It'd be really interesting.
09/26/09
Poor families. I hope fertility clinics see this as a huge wake up call and make certain they have procedures in place to make sure that this can never happen to someone else.
09/27/09
09/26/09
09/26/09
09/26/09
09/26/09
09/26/09
[www.nola.com]
09/26/09
09/26/09
09/26/09
09/26/09
2) I'm not saying she doesn't have a right to, but what is the logic behind having several children already and going through an expensive/heartbreaking medical procedure to have another? I can't wrap my head around someone wanting that - and that's the situation for both families. I can understand taking that risk to have a child. Or wanting a child to not be an only. Beyond that - and I admit this is my own perspective - I just don't get it. People can do whatever they want in this situation, it just doesn't make sense to me.
09/26/09
That's exactly what I thought when I read this story a while ago. They've got plenty of kids, why go through this evasive, expensive procedure for another? Good thing she can't pop out more. Fucking Christians and their "be fruitful and multiply" motto.
09/26/09
09/26/09
It's not just you. Once they hit the "already have other 2 children" part of the story, they lost me.
09/26/09
09/26/09
09/26/09
The articles didn't even make reference to their religion- the only semi religious thing is that they thanked people for their prayers.
I can see lots of reasons for wanting more kids. Maybe #3 is far younger than #1 & #2, making s/he like an only. Maybe they both came from big families. Maybe they just like kids. Its her body and her choice.
I think someone with this kind of generous spirit is exactly who you want having kids.
09/26/09
Hopefully they will be able to find a surrogate for their fourth child and the clinic will do what it can to "make things right." Let their kindness be repaid!
I'm going to go try to do some good for the day! Like sort my recycling from my trash...
09/26/09
09/26/09
09/26/09
09/26/09
CParis- they lost me at the fact that her third kid is 18 months too! I can't imagine wanting a fourth kid so much that I would continue to go through such a painful process if I'd been through what she has. I'd be throwing the towel in for sure. But hey, I'm a quitter.
09/26/09
09/26/09
09/26/09
So they wanted four kids - so what? Did YOU have to pay for it? Was YOUR body used for the invasive (not "evasive") procedure? No? Then it's none of your business.
09/26/09
If people want to have a bunch of kids, cool, they can go for it. They just better not pretend to care about the environment or the effects of overpopulation.
09/26/09
09/26/09
09/26/09
There are tons of things I want but don't get for myself because the impact said items would have would be bad. I call that "responsibility".
Have 18 kids if you want. Just don't lecture people who run their heat/air all day, have 5 cars, have a couple boats, refuse to recycle, and have a summer house (or 3).
09/26/09
09/26/09
I agree with you that people should consider the impact of all their choices. Whether I choose to have children or not, I'll make an effort to limit my environmental impact.
Children and environmental impact aren't linked as cleanly as people like to pretend. I know plenty of larger families, who due to having fewer resources per child, had far fewer toys, electronics, cars, expensive vacations than families with fewer children. and certainly no summer homes.
09/26/09
09/26/09
And this conversation about how many children you should have and its affect on the environment will likely have nothing to do with this woman; she had 3, a perfectly reasonably number, and will probably end it at that. I would be surprised if she could even find a surrogate- since it is such a big deal deal to go through for someone most surrogates want to do it for a gay couple or a couple that is infertile, not to give someone a 4th child. So end of story, 3 kids.
09/26/09
09/26/09
BTW, kudos to you for being so environmentally responsible in your purchases. But you might want to know that the decision to have a child, or how many children you want to have, isn't the same as deciding on what type of car to drive. It's a bit more complicated, and personal, than that.
09/26/09
Oh, you're right, family size isn't the indicator. Someone adopts 5 (or 10 or 18) kids? Cool. People adding to the population? Feh.
What would happen if every couple had 4 kids? Is it reasonable then? Do we have an unlimited amount of space/resources? I mean, I don't even know why I'll care, I'll be dead before the shit really hits the fan.
According to the UNFPA, the world's population (~6.7 billion) will double in the next 40 years if current growth rates are left unchecked. ~13.4 billion people by 2050, regardless of which ecological model you use the ecosystem falls apart ~10-12 billion people, the UN estimates have always stated that the global population would max out at at 9 billion.
But yes. Having as many kids as you want is OK. Just don't pretend to give a shit.
09/26/09
09/26/09
I don't have strong feelings about this either way, but you did ask.
09/26/09
People who have lots of kids (biologically) WOULD be hypocrites if they "cared" about the environment. If they don't care then they aren't hypocrites.
09/26/09
Each human life has the potential to improve the world.
09/26/09
If people want to have infertility treatment, it is up to them.
09/26/09
Look, I don't have kids. I don't want kids. This story isn't about your inability, or anyone else's inability, to comprehend this woman's choices. It also isn't about overpopulation, IVF vs. adoption, or anything else you and other commenters here want to make it be about. It's about a person doing the decent and selfless thing, so quit paying lip service to a woman's right to decide what she wants, okay? It's hypocritical, and in this context, it's seriously pissing me off.
09/26/09
09/26/09
I don't understand why the same people who insist on a woman's right to an abortion get so judgmental about a woman's right to have as many damn children as she pleases, if she is able to care for and support them.
09/26/09
Not to mention, my parents raised me to be a religious conservative. That didn't work out to well, hah. Children turn into adults who have minds of their own. In my opinion, humans have more potential to destroy than they do to improve. Destruction is easier than improvement, and I think the average person is going to take the path of least resistance.
09/26/09
And it does take a village to raise a child. Unless you're a multimillionaire raising your family off of food and energy you produce yourself - we all chip in someway through our taxes, etc.
These families can do whatever they want with their bodies, etc - but I don't know why some people should expect everyone to actively praise their choices.
09/26/09
09/26/09
09/26/09
People who frequently travel by airplane have an enormous carbon footprint. Nobody calls them irresponsible. People who choose to live in Las Vegas or Florida or other places that require tremendous amounts of air conditioning also have huge carbon footprints. So do those who eat beef, drive cars with any regularity, and live in large houses.
This tired, hateful argument is simply child-hate masquerading as environmentalism, and, frankly, I'm fucking fed up with it.
09/26/09
09/26/09
It's a choice, but some choices aren't always good. A choice isn't good by virtue of it being a choice. Like I said, driving a hummer is a choice. Doesn't mean it's "good".
09/26/09
09/26/09
09/26/09
09/26/09
09/26/09
09/26/09
CHOICES AREN'T ALWAYS GOOD. THERE IS SUCH A THING AS A BAD CHOICE.
Can people please try and read a whole thread before they respond? I'm tired of repeating myself.
09/26/09
I also think it's silly to actively hope that these people are working at cross purposes to something you obviously care about because they made choices you don't agree with.
09/26/09
09/26/09
09/26/09
You might not deem having a child a "good" choice, but other people do because climate change isn't the only thing that influences people's choices to have children
09/26/09
I'm assuming you read the numbers I quoted from the UN? If anyone knows of those numbers and can defend people having too many children, they probably don't care that much.
09/26/09
As I have mentioned previously both our opinions are based on our entirely subjective take on the issue.
I hope for the future that we can all manage to have meaningful and compassionate discourse on population and climate change. I also hope that all people regardless of family size will come to see the issue as important and do the best they can for the environment.
More than anything I wish Mrs. Savage and her family peace and healing in what is surely a difficult time regardless of their stance on global warming and recycling.
09/26/09
09/26/09
No one has been offering up any solutions to overpopulation. Or dwindling resources. Just "choice".
Numbers/Science beat Theory.
09/26/09
What exactly is the logic here? Saying that an argument against overpopulation is "child-hate" is simplistic and misses the point. Yes, people can have as many children as they want. That doesn't mean that people who have lots of kids are somehow not contributing to overall population growth, which contributes to future resource consumption. Them's the facts, ma'am.
Should we vilify those people? No. Should we pretend that there is no impact, or that the impact is somehow mitigated by made up hypothetical non-breeders who fly cross-country every month? No.
09/26/09
09/26/09
As for saying that every argument against overpopulation is "child-hate": I am not saying that. I worry about overpopulation too. I am calling out certain, specific commenters here who can't read any post that has anything to do with children without spewing their vicious anti-child bullshit.
09/26/09
09/26/09
Gee, this is fun! See, I can play this game, too.
I agree with ihateyourescalade - you can couch this in moral superiority about your concern for the environment, but it seems like just another excuse to display your well-known antipathy toward children and moms. It's tiresome and really has nothing to do with this story of a woman's unbelievable sacrifice.
09/26/09
You can only play the game if you're GOOD at it!
I don't have antipathy for children/moms/dads (why do you leave fathers out in your claims of who I hate??). You're just easily offended and don't like hearing that your choices aren't good. I don't understand why else you're so ass hurt.
It doesn't have much to do with the story, but this thread was a tangent from the beginning. Why don't you go back and read from the start.
Oh, and I would LURVE to hear your opinion on overpopulation.
09/26/09
More stupid women should have abortions.
09/26/09
09/26/09
I know people in nursing homes have families. The families are the ones paying the bills. Who will take care of you when you're old and out of money?
Why do you think I'm easily offended? Just because I disagree with you doesn't mean you've hurt my feelings. Sorry if that was what you were going for.
My choices are DAMN good, thank you.
I've read the whole thread. You're the one who brought up overpopulation in response to me saying that Carolyn Savage's decision on having four kids was no one else's business. So that's your dime.
My thoughts on overpopulation? I sincerely hope that one of my brilliant children will find a way to increase food production, bring clean water to every corner of the world and help reduce suffering. That's the best I can do for now. Flame away! You've given me no reason to care about what you think.
Sweet dreams - I'm off to bed!
09/26/09
you and everyone else but that doesn't quite solve things, now does it?
09/27/09
09/26/09
I hope the Savages are able to find peace, and a surrogate willing to show them the came compassion.
09/26/09
What a dame.
09/26/09
09/26/09
09/26/09
12/31/08
12/31/08
On the other hand, it pisses me off something fierce that there are so very many unwanted children in the world who already exist, so why on earth can't these women/couples take all their time, effort, and money out of contributing to the population problem and instead put it where it's truly needed?
The judgmentz - I haz them, but I doez not want them =(