Surrogate parenting has increased in popularity as a solution to infertility.  We’ve all read about family members carrying another family member’s baby to term or about some woman who has agreed to do so for an infertile couple for a fee.  Now, in India, there are 40 -50 women doing this in a commercial operation.

Some people question whether this is a legitimate or ethical activity.  Why wouldn’t it be?  Or, rather, why would it be ok in single iterations and not en masse?  In fact, the Indian version sounds much healthier.  Presumably, the surrogates are cared for in a healthful, nurturing environment with proper nutrition and medical care.  Their job is to carry a healthy baby to term for an infertile couple.  In exchange, they earn more money than they might earn in fifteen years.  Additionally, they are provided with counseling after the event — something that makes a lot of sense, since my thought for this process is the emotional difficulty in giving up a baby that has grown in one’s body for the term of the pregnancy.  Even knowing in advance that the baby would not be staying with them, I would imagine it may be difficult post-partum for some if not all of the women.

The concern expressed in the article that this would evolve from a necessity for infertile couples to a convenience for the rich.  Would this change the ethical picture for the procedure?  How is it different from adopting (other than knowing the child produced is genetically yours)?  What do you think?