> “There’s no one statistic, but this is a family type that does seem to be on the rise,” says Dr Catherine Jones, a lecturer at King’s College London and an expert in family psychology.
> Dr Jones recently published a study of single fathers-by-surrogacy in Britain and elsewhere. Many were gay, but more than a handful were heterosexual, like Smith. It’s believed that many men pursuing this route to fatherhood have either struggled to find a relationship, or left long-term partners because of incompatible approaches to having children.
> The main hurdle for men in this position was money rather than stigma, says Dr Jones, suggesting that many more men would pursue it were it easier and less costly.
> “Even with many fathers saving up, the cost can be difficult as fees are often really high,” Dr Jones says.
> While surrogacy is legal in the UK, it is illegal for anyone to advertise that they are either looking for a surrogate or willing to be one. Many looking for an arrangement still go abroad.
Interesting sign of the times as increasing numbers of single men are turning to surrogacy to have natural children.
Still a very expensive and risky route though costing an average of £45,000 in the UK and not many legal safeguards if the mother changes their mind.
[deleted] on
[removed]
sickofsnails on
What’s wrong with finding a nice partner to have a child with? I don’t understand why you’d deliberately put your child at a disadvantage, while also using somebody else’s bodies to conceive and carry them.
SeditiousPocket on
It’s explotative – there is plenty of research to show that this is not a good thing. The EU have banned commercial surrogacy so people go abroad to poor countries where women are exploited. Do you not remember the stories that came out of Ukraine?
No one has the right to a child, and the bodies of women and children should never be treated as commodities.
duffyDmonkey on
Thank you OP. This gives me hope.
Let’s see how many people will get triggered by this.
walang-buhay on
I highly doubt some will admit their hypocrisy when it comes to their opinions/standards for men, women or anyone in between. Some always seem to pick one or the other as far superior.
It’ll be interesting to see the variety of comments if this post picks up.
roboticlee on
It’s funny that people are okay with women going to a sperm bank or setting out to get pregnant from a one night stand but the morals of men who opt to find a surrogate to carry their child are questioned.
Why not adopt? Counterpoint: Why should someone not have a child that is biologically there own?
Women have a right to have a child but men, according to the gatekeepers, do not. How enlightened.
5TART on
Tons of career driven women who don’t want to mess around with a husband but still want kids do this so it’s natural that men in the same position would also want it
pikantnasuka on
Elsewhere in the comments OP has dismissed the risk to life that pregnancy and birth present as “hyperbole” on the grounds that the maternal death rate in the UK is 13.41 women per 100,000 pregnancies.
This is an astounding thing to say.
Pregnancy and childbirth kill. It is not hyperbole to say so.
The article makes clear that the majority of men renting out women’s wombs go abroad to do so. Even in the UK, the risks to life and wellbeing are very, very real. You might think the rate of death is low enough to describe the risk of it as hyperbole, but that doesn’t change that the risk is there, and real. And what about the risk of lasting injury? What do you know about the rates of those? What about trauma?
And for those of you asserting that surrogacy is a woman’s free choice… come on. Altruistic surrogacy may be. Commercial surrogacy? Really?
Commercial surrogacy is attractive only to women without other options. I have had multiple pregnancies and births, there is *no way* I would do it for money. And I don’t have to, because I have qualifications and a job and options. The pool of women who *could* survive in other ways but who prefer to undergo the suffering, trauma and risk of pregnancy and birth to do so instead is so small as to be negligible.
DecompressionIllness on
Well, women use IVF, sperm donations, surrogacy etc, to become single parents so I don’t see anything wrong with men doing the same thing so long as the surrogacy is conducted in a manner in which the surrogate has all of the control.
porspeling on
Surrogacy, whoever is paying for it whether it’s a man, woman or couple is such a messed up concept. To exploit someone who is poorer than you, make them go through the harsh and sometimes dangerous physical process of carrying a child and then the emotional toll of getting that child taken away from them straight after birth?
If you can’t have a child yourself and want one so bad then adopt. It is insanely selfish and arrogant to put someone through surrogacy.
Hot_Bet_2721 on
Every other medical process that potentially carries risk:
r/UK: “Healthcare ✨”
Adult Men and Women mutally enter an agreement to go through a medical process that potentially carries risk:
r/UK: “Distusting! Exploitation! 🤬”
Anonlaowai on
My controversial opinion: if you’re not equipped to deal with a relationship you’re simply not equipped to be a parent.
Ekalips on
Yet again some people in comments are trying to ban women from doing what they want because apparently it pleases men. Sure, it’s better to turn it all into illegal business without any protections for any party rather than regulate and control it, and, especially, require/guarantee safety, gosh. What next, force women to cover themselves because men find them pleasing to watch at, huh?
Disciplined_20-04-15 on
I’m considering this, I can’t find a woman who wants a family been searching for years maybe I’m just unlucky.
Thrasy3 on
The comments here…
I’m childfree and pretty much an antinatalist – arguably a misanthrope, so it’s obvious where my overall opinion lies, but the arguments against this here are somehow both misogynistic and misandrist in the weirdest way.
It comes across as either (or both) specifically men can’t ask for surrogacy (but it’d be ok for a woman or a couple), or women are unable to decide to take the risk themselves (somehow especially if it’s for a man).
Like I’d love the idea that a lot of people posting opposition are anti-natalists like me, but I’m not getting that vibe at all.
bulldog_blues on
Mixed thoughts on this.
On the one hand, provided the woman is freely consenting and there’s no financial gain involved, it’s not anyone else’s business and more power to them for raising healthy children in a non-traditional environment.
On the other hand, the risk to the surrogate mother from the pregnancy and childbirth can’t be brushed under the carpet, plus the impact that can come from having the baby taken away straight after birth – it really isn’t possible to know how you’ll react until it happens.
It’s a complicated topic.
mronion82 on
To my mind, people are deceiving themselves about surrogacy in the same way they do about prostitution.
It’d be great to believe that it’s just a ‘my body my choice’ issue, that women doing surrogacy are healthy and well fed, just love being pregnant and want to help childless people. In the same way, it’s comfortable for us to believe in the ‘happy hooker’ trope.
But really, who’s going to be drawn to this? Desperate, poor women who probably have kids already and need money. Selling their own health to feed their children. That’s exploitative.
And what happens if a scan shows defects in the child? Is the woman forced to abort, can the biological parents just walk away and leave her responsible?
This is not the easy, trouble free solution to childlessness that a lot of commenter here seem to think it is.
18 Comments
> “There’s no one statistic, but this is a family type that does seem to be on the rise,” says Dr Catherine Jones, a lecturer at King’s College London and an expert in family psychology.
> Dr Jones recently published a study of single fathers-by-surrogacy in Britain and elsewhere. Many were gay, but more than a handful were heterosexual, like Smith. It’s believed that many men pursuing this route to fatherhood have either struggled to find a relationship, or left long-term partners because of incompatible approaches to having children.
> The main hurdle for men in this position was money rather than stigma, says Dr Jones, suggesting that many more men would pursue it were it easier and less costly.
> “Even with many fathers saving up, the cost can be difficult as fees are often really high,” Dr Jones says.
> While surrogacy is legal in the UK, it is illegal for anyone to advertise that they are either looking for a surrogate or willing to be one. Many looking for an arrangement still go abroad.
Interesting sign of the times as increasing numbers of single men are turning to surrogacy to have natural children.
Still a very expensive and risky route though costing an average of £45,000 in the UK and not many legal safeguards if the mother changes their mind.
[removed]
What’s wrong with finding a nice partner to have a child with? I don’t understand why you’d deliberately put your child at a disadvantage, while also using somebody else’s bodies to conceive and carry them.
It’s explotative – there is plenty of research to show that this is not a good thing. The EU have banned commercial surrogacy so people go abroad to poor countries where women are exploited. Do you not remember the stories that came out of Ukraine?
No one has the right to a child, and the bodies of women and children should never be treated as commodities.
Thank you OP. This gives me hope.
Let’s see how many people will get triggered by this.
I highly doubt some will admit their hypocrisy when it comes to their opinions/standards for men, women or anyone in between. Some always seem to pick one or the other as far superior.
It’ll be interesting to see the variety of comments if this post picks up.
It’s funny that people are okay with women going to a sperm bank or setting out to get pregnant from a one night stand but the morals of men who opt to find a surrogate to carry their child are questioned.
Why not adopt? Counterpoint: Why should someone not have a child that is biologically there own?
Women have a right to have a child but men, according to the gatekeepers, do not. How enlightened.
Tons of career driven women who don’t want to mess around with a husband but still want kids do this so it’s natural that men in the same position would also want it
Elsewhere in the comments OP has dismissed the risk to life that pregnancy and birth present as “hyperbole” on the grounds that the maternal death rate in the UK is 13.41 women per 100,000 pregnancies.
This is an astounding thing to say.
Pregnancy and childbirth kill. It is not hyperbole to say so.
The article makes clear that the majority of men renting out women’s wombs go abroad to do so. Even in the UK, the risks to life and wellbeing are very, very real. You might think the rate of death is low enough to describe the risk of it as hyperbole, but that doesn’t change that the risk is there, and real. And what about the risk of lasting injury? What do you know about the rates of those? What about trauma?
For those of you, like OP, who see pregnancy and birth as easy, simple little things that come with minimal risk of death and lifelong suffering, [read](https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c4n1jv7xxpwo) [about](https://www.theo-clarke.org.uk/sites/www.theo-clarke.org.uk/files/2024-05/Birth%20Trauma%20Inquiry%20Report%20for%20Publication_May13_2024.pdf) [reality](https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2023-10-19/debates/D9DC6BAC-118F-4EA1-BE02-F815D5BE6436/BirthTrauma).
And for those of you asserting that surrogacy is a woman’s free choice… come on. Altruistic surrogacy may be. Commercial surrogacy? Really?
Commercial surrogacy is attractive only to women without other options. I have had multiple pregnancies and births, there is *no way* I would do it for money. And I don’t have to, because I have qualifications and a job and options. The pool of women who *could* survive in other ways but who prefer to undergo the suffering, trauma and risk of pregnancy and birth to do so instead is so small as to be negligible.
Well, women use IVF, sperm donations, surrogacy etc, to become single parents so I don’t see anything wrong with men doing the same thing so long as the surrogacy is conducted in a manner in which the surrogate has all of the control.
Surrogacy, whoever is paying for it whether it’s a man, woman or couple is such a messed up concept. To exploit someone who is poorer than you, make them go through the harsh and sometimes dangerous physical process of carrying a child and then the emotional toll of getting that child taken away from them straight after birth?
If you can’t have a child yourself and want one so bad then adopt. It is insanely selfish and arrogant to put someone through surrogacy.
Every other medical process that potentially carries risk:
r/UK: “Healthcare ✨”
Adult Men and Women mutally enter an agreement to go through a medical process that potentially carries risk:
r/UK: “Distusting! Exploitation! 🤬”
My controversial opinion: if you’re not equipped to deal with a relationship you’re simply not equipped to be a parent.
Yet again some people in comments are trying to ban women from doing what they want because apparently it pleases men. Sure, it’s better to turn it all into illegal business without any protections for any party rather than regulate and control it, and, especially, require/guarantee safety, gosh. What next, force women to cover themselves because men find them pleasing to watch at, huh?
I’m considering this, I can’t find a woman who wants a family been searching for years maybe I’m just unlucky.
The comments here…
I’m childfree and pretty much an antinatalist – arguably a misanthrope, so it’s obvious where my overall opinion lies, but the arguments against this here are somehow both misogynistic and misandrist in the weirdest way.
It comes across as either (or both) specifically men can’t ask for surrogacy (but it’d be ok for a woman or a couple), or women are unable to decide to take the risk themselves (somehow especially if it’s for a man).
Like I’d love the idea that a lot of people posting opposition are anti-natalists like me, but I’m not getting that vibe at all.
Mixed thoughts on this.
On the one hand, provided the woman is freely consenting and there’s no financial gain involved, it’s not anyone else’s business and more power to them for raising healthy children in a non-traditional environment.
On the other hand, the risk to the surrogate mother from the pregnancy and childbirth can’t be brushed under the carpet, plus the impact that can come from having the baby taken away straight after birth – it really isn’t possible to know how you’ll react until it happens.
It’s a complicated topic.
To my mind, people are deceiving themselves about surrogacy in the same way they do about prostitution.
It’d be great to believe that it’s just a ‘my body my choice’ issue, that women doing surrogacy are healthy and well fed, just love being pregnant and want to help childless people. In the same way, it’s comfortable for us to believe in the ‘happy hooker’ trope.
But really, who’s going to be drawn to this? Desperate, poor women who probably have kids already and need money. Selling their own health to feed their children. That’s exploitative.
And what happens if a scan shows defects in the child? Is the woman forced to abort, can the biological parents just walk away and leave her responsible?
This is not the easy, trouble free solution to childlessness that a lot of commenter here seem to think it is.