The Parent Makers … Orrrrr … The Handmaid’s Tale Redux

Did I say that the media promotes the creation/selling/buying of babies?

Did I say that the media is misogynist and makes light of the exploitation and degradation of women committed by commercialized medicine?

I linked to a number of examples of media propaganda for this brutal, dehumanizing exploitation of women and girls; this barbaric practice of creating/selling/buying people. But, as so often happens, I was aiming a bit too high on the food chain. I didn’t know about The Parent Makers.

This show is about an American organization called the British Surrogacy Center. The British Surrogacy Center is in California. So don’t let the accent fool you, this is the good ole USA, the Wild West of reproductive technology.

We are the big dogs in the baby creating/selling/buying junkyard. No one can compete with us in terms of reducing women, babies and human beings to the level of objects. We’ve got the market cornered on medicine’s inhumanity to women and children.

The Parent Makers is trash.

It is, however, highly-publicized trash.

The Parent Makers gets lots of hits on Google:

And it has it’s own equally trashy Twitter account:

It even has promos on YouTube.

Watch the video below and then ask yourself one question: Do you want your daughter used as a breeder for these guys? Do you want your grandchildren or your children created like widgets in a factory and then sold to the highest bidder?

If you don’t, you’d better start speaking out.

This is the world of the for-real Handmaid’s Tale.

And it ain’t pretty.

YouTube Preview Image

Public Catholic reader Caroline Farrow brought this story to my attention. Thank you Caroline!

  • James

    One of the more absurd things about such “baby making” is that it requires two women, not one-an egg donor and a surrogate.

    Why can’t the surrogate use her own eggs? It would be easier, cheaper, safer and far less invasive. Pregnancy would involve simple artificial insemination instead of egg harvesting and IVF.

    The reason why the surrogate can’t use her own eggs is that the surrogate then becomes the mother and you can’t have a contract to sell your own child. The absurd part is if you split the “mother” into two different women, you can. Society naturally recoils in horror at a contract to sell your child, yet has absolutely no problem with women risking their health to get around this taboo.

  • SisterCynthia

    And, just popping up today… another little problem with turning little human beings into objects you can arrange to buy, thru technically “non-purchasing” legal arrangements:

    http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Hollywood/2014/07/09/The-View-Host-Rejects-Unborn-IVF-Baby-Experts-Respond

    Reminds me of another celeb couple that split, two gay guys, who had had twins via surrogate, one biologically the product of each man. They split up and each took “their” child with them, to opposite coasts, severing the twins from each other after being gestated together and spending their first (I think it was like a) year or so together. After all, they figured, they weren’t “really” siblings. Yep. Brave new world, indeed. :-/

  • Keary McHugh

    I felt ill when I heard the one guy (the “father”?) announce that he payed for a gorgeous, designer child with straight hair– the mind set behind it is beyond sickening. Children are NOT a consumer good that one can tailor to suit the aesthetic one desires. How long before a parent can “return” a kid that isn’t what they wanted– like one can return a car or a purse?

  • oregon nurse

    That ‘man’ is one of the most disgusting humans I’ve ever seen.

  • hamiltonr

    Aside from the moral implications of this, do you have any idea what is done to women whose ovaries are harvested? This is a monstrous practice pagansister. One way it is excused is by trying to equate it with sperm donation. I don’t feel like going through it right now, but it’s like the old joke about eggs and bacon. The chicken was involved, the pig was committed.

    What I am advocating is simply to take the money out of it. If people want to volunteer, then, with the caveats I mentioned, I do not advocate making it illegal.

  • hamiltonr

    No woman should be paid to have her ovaries harvested. Period. Just as no one is paid to donate a kidney. This should be treated the same as organ donation.

    I remember reading about the adopted child who was returned to Russia. When I was in the legislature back in the 80s, the organizations that did international adoptions lobbied ceaselessly and successfully for regulations that basically shut down domestic adoptions. I am not talking about the people who adopt internationally because they cannot adopt a child any other way. I know people who’ve done this and every one I know is over the moon about their baby. However, I know, for a fact, that one of the reasons that it’s so hard to adopt here in this country is that the international adoption agencies worked to make it that way. The dollar before people. Again.

  • hamiltonr

    I think you’re too pro woman not to be against commercialized egg harvesting, mi amiga.

  • ME

    And “sending them back” is what you do with a return for a defective product. A child in any way should NEVER be considered a product. And this is the reason that the Church is against anything but natural procreation and pushes for sex only within the confines of a marital covenant, so that the parties with vested interest (mother and father) can raise the child together. Creating children through IVF has lots of unintended consequences for the children. Have you looked at any of the advocacy groups started by children conceived in this manner? The selfishness of the desire of the parents to have children using these technologies is creating psychological problems for the babies. Here is one example… http://childrenhaverights-saynotoreprotech.blogspot.com/2009/02/ivf-children-are-living-experiment.html

  • david

    Had he not had the vasectomy instead of indulging in his own self interest he would never have had to “hire” a donor. Two (or 3 or 4) wrongs still do not make a right. Plus, no matter how “fine” the children seem to be they are still deprived of their natural father.

    • http://outsidetheautisticasylum.blogspot.com/ Theodore Seeber

      Not to mention the divorce. Why do women waste time on men who are such children?

  • http://outsidetheautisticasylum.blogspot.com/ Theodore Seeber

    I was 18 once. But even then, I was searching for a woman to marry forever.

    I was going about it all wrong though.

    I have a tendency to be disapproving of the serial adultery culture we now live in; I consider it to be inferior at best and quite dangerous for children and women at worst.

    A woman would do well to listen to the first wife of any man she’s dating. There is a reason he is divorced.


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X