The logic, it hurts:
This week, Sweden took a firm stand against surrogacy. The governmental inquiry on surrogacy published its conclusions, which the parliament is expected to approve later this year. These include banning all surrogacy, commercial as well as altruistic, and taking steps to prevent citizens from going to clinics abroad.
Eh?
In any case, the notion of “altruistic” surrogacy – apart from being a red herring, since it barely happens in reality – has a very strange ideological underpinning. As if exploitation only consisted in giving the woman money. In that case, the less she is paid, the less she is exploited.
In reality, “altruistic” surrogacy means that a woman goes through exactly the same thing as in commercial surrogacy, but gets nothing in return.
Since when did the Objectivist meaning of altruism make it over into feminism?
And there’s really something very odd indeed about this. We have a society where any woman can have any type of sex, with or without contraceptives, as she likes rightly so. We also say (less rightly to my mind but whatever) that she may keep or dispose of that possibly resultant fetus as she wishes. And now we’re to say that in fact you can’t do either of those things?
Further, how in buggery do you enforce this? Forced abortions? Forced adoptions? What?
The left (for want of a better term to describe these people) will eat itself. Ask Peter Tatchell.
Okay, so a Swedish couple wish to have a child, but can’t as she is infertile, so they move to the UK, have said kid with a surrogate in the UK (again perfectly legal) and then move back to Sweden.
Where in all of this is a crime committed and what law is being broken that Sweden could actually prevail against?
The Swedes have turned themselves–or two-thirds of them at least–into self-destructive scum who long to kiss the arse of tyranny and their own destruction.
If this is just an attempt to reduce the number of white Swedes even further its seems an egregiously stupid one.
Utterly ridiculous. A friend of mine was a surrogate mother for a gay Icelandic couple. To think that she wouldn’t be allowed to do it in another supposedly tolerant Scandinavian country is crazy.
“To think that she wouldn’t be allowed to do it in another supposedly tolerant Scandinavian country is crazy.” Hang on; you’re not saying that different countries shouldn’t have different laws, are you?
This sort of thing is nothing new in Sweden.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compulsory_sterilisation_in_Sweden
It’s probably why Polly Toynbee calls modern Sweden the most successful country in the World.
“Further, how in buggery do you enforce this? Forced abortions? Forced adoptions? What?”
Denied adoptions, presumably. So when the infertile couple tries to adopt the surrogate’s child, they don’t let them.
Sweden is a very strange country indeed. Presumably this is why the Left loves it above all others.
@Ian Reid
you beat me to it….
That said – the whole thing is imho pressurising as the lefty bully hold of MSM in Sweden is driving the disenfranchised in a Newton’s 3rd law of motion moment.
How to escape Swedish jurisdiction? We know the answer to this: surrogate mothers should take refuge in the embassies of Ecuador.
If you ban it, it will stop. I thought everybody knew that.
What the cif article says doesn’t match what’s actually going on. In particular, the Rosberg report “examined only the medical ethics of the issue and had not studied the numerous complex legal issues involved in a surrogacy contract”.
Reportedly only two small parties in the Swedish parliament support an outright ban – the Left Party and the Christian Democrats.
What happened to all the stuff about not telling women what they can do with their own bodies, from the abortion rhetoric?
Seems grossly sexist to me. If she’s infertile, a crime. If he’s infertile, mere confiscation of the turkey baster.
Is this some sort of fascist hangover, exercising micro-control about details of individual lives?
I note that Sweden did not withdraw compulsory sterilisation as a condition for sex change until 5 years ago.
This is a very strange situation. Here in the UK it is complicated to have a successful surrogacy arrangement, but it is possible (though offering surrogacy in any commercial fashion is illegal). The rules are so arcane that the courts are turning themselves inside out to do the right thing, yet it is estimated that there are a great many surrogate children, living with the people who wanted them, but who may not be legally the parents (a thing called a Parental Order needs to be sought and granted, which is being missed by people who seek surrogates abroad due to inadequate advice about the Byzantine regulations). Some countries do ban surrogacy, but it usually on religious grounds, which make as little sense as the reported Swedish attitude, but for different reasons.
Interestingly, whilst I usually regard the sort of argument put forward by Mr Ecks as being – well, bonkers* – there is some evidence that surrogacy is relatively easy amongst some ethnic groups that have moved to the West because of their lack of contact with health and social services. As a colleague once put it, “One Mohammed is much the same as another”.
* I don’t believe there is any conspiracy to make ethnically white people extinct. Why would there be such a thing?
If any country deserves what’s coming to it, it’s Sweden.
Ian B – “If any country deserves what’s coming to it, it’s Sweden.”
They can be forgiven for Abba. They cannot be forgiven for Ace of Base.
However the long slow suicide of Sweden is sad.
But SMFS..All That She Wants..is another baby?
+1
So facing demographic destruction The solution is to reduce another possible means of population expansion? Welcome to the world of the Hard Left – which as the brilliant Mr Ecks points out is likely to consume itself. I guess ISIS probably moved Sweden up the list of states to target….