Can You Be Anti-Child Abuse And Pro-Surrogacy At The Same Time?

Celebrities and influencers are turning surrogacy into a trend. The latest news of YouTubers Shane Dawson and Ryland Adams welcoming twin boys into the world via surrogacy has gone viral, sparking another heated debate about whether they should be allowed to bring home babies in such a way.

By Gina Florio4 min read
Pexels/Polina Tankilevitch

Shane Dawson has a long history of sexualizing children, delighting in the fact that an infant was raped, attempting to normalize pedophilia, and trying to coerce underage girls into performing lewd acts in front of a camera. He probably would not be cleared by adoption agencies to adopt a child, but he found a loophole: pay enough money to do IVF and hire a surrogate to carry children so he can bring them home. 

This, of course, isn’t the only time we’ve seen celebrities share their surrogacy experience with the world. Khloe Kardashian recently opened up about her contrasting experiences with her children, True and Tatum. She admitted that forming a bond with Tatum has been more challenging than with True, taking months to develop compared to just days with her daughter because Tatum was born via surrogate. Khloe expressed guilt over this difference and questioned why the bonding process has not been the same with her son.

Tatum was born in July 2022 via a surrogate mother, a decision made by Khloe and her ex Tristan Thompson. She described the surrogacy process as more "transactional," feeling the reality of becoming a mother again only when she reached the hospital. This contrasts sharply with her experience of traditional pregnancy. Kim Kardashian, Khloe's sister, shared similar sentiments. Having experienced both natural childbirth and surrogacy, Kim noted a possible difference in emotional bonding due to the physical connection during a conventional pregnancy.

Lance Bass also admitted that he and his gay husband couldn’t connect with his twins in the first year of their life because they were born via surrogate. If these celebrities were willing to talk about this publicly, imagine how many people who welcome children via surrogacy have had a hard time connecting with their kids too? It begs the question: Is surrogacy an appropriate way to bring children into the world, or is it an abusive endeavor that should be brought to a halt? 

Why Surrogacy Is Immoral 

Whether it’s a gay or heterosexual couple, the heart of surrogacy is exactly the same: creating and passing around children as if they are commodities. The practice of surrogacy is more similar to gender ideology and transgenderism than most like to admit, because all of the above refuse to distinguish between men and women. We see this manifest in surrogacy as the distinct roles of mother and father becoming irrelevant. A baby can be given to two fathers or two mothers, or the child can be carried by one woman, only to be handed off to a man and woman that the baby has never met. This all is built on the foundation that children are commodities rather than individuals with rights. 

The biological bond between parents and children is irreplaceable, especially when it comes to mothers and their babies. The growing industry of surrogacy facilitates the separation of infants from their biological mothers, which is cruel and unnatural. What was once a rare tragedy – a child being taken away from his mother because of an accident, death, etc. – is now a common practice that can be achieved by anyone who pays the right amount.

It’s not useful or even accurate to blame this all on homosexual couples and their desire to have children (although that is certainly a factor). The rise of surrogacy is caused by a series of cultural delusions and a degradation of morality in our society. As wonderful as capitalism has been for our economy, we’ve been seeing it grow in an unbridled manner, without any moral principles to shape it or place boundaries on it; this has resulted in unchecked industries like surrogacy growing at a rapid rate and allowing children to be traded around as if they are commodities. 

Adoption prioritizes the well-being of the child over the desires of adults; surrogacy prioritizes the desires of adults over the well-being and rights of the child. 

You Can’t Be Anti-Child Abuse and Pro-Surrogacy

In a “gotcha” attempt, people like to compare surrogacy to adoption and claim that they are exactly the same. Nothing could be further from the truth. Adoption, at its core, prioritizes the well-being of the child over the desires of adults. That is the complete opposite of surrogacy, which exclusively prioritizes the desires of adults over the well-being of the child. The adoption world is not perfect, and there are certainly ways that people can take advantage of the situation, but the whole purpose of adoption is to remove a child from a tragic, perhaps even abusive, situation and place them in the hands of loving parents who will provide them with a better home. Would it be better for the child to have biological parents who are alive and healthy to raise them? Of course. But we live in a broken world, and that is simply not a possibility for many children. That’s why adoption is necessary, so that the child still has an opportunity to grow up in a loving home. However, surrogacy intentionally creates a tragic, unhealthy situation for children so that two adults can have the pleasure of bringing a baby home. Very different than adoption. 

It may sound like a harsh way to put it, but surrogacy is an abusive process that begins with the dehumanization of children. In most cases, surrogacy begins with IVF (in vitro fertilization). Just like Dawson and Adams did, couples will be left with multiple embryos, and they will only use a select few, depending on which gender they want. The rest of the embryos will be stored or destroyed – which is the equivalency of an abortion. This is once again an example of how children are treated as products that can be bought or disposed of, which is the heart of surrogacy. 

After the couple “chooses” which child to give birth to, that embryo is then implanted into a complete stranger – a woman whose womb is rented out (another human being who is treated like a commodity) at the highest price. Even though the child may not be biologically related to the surrogate mother, he knows everything about her and develops an intimate relationship with her. He knows her voice, heartbeat, laugh, gait, and smell. The deep biological and physiological connection developed between a mother and the child she carries is more powerful than science will ever be able to fully describe; that means the baby will have a special bond with the mother who carries him even if they don’t share DNA. It’s downright traumatic to steal that child away from the only mother he ever knew immediately after birth and hand him off to complete strangers. That will inevitably result in attachment issues and difficulties adjusting to the world; the woman who carries the child into the world is the very person who is designed to introduce that baby to the big, scary world that he is unfamiliar with. 

Anyone who is anti-child abuse must oppose surrogacy in order to be morally and logically consistent. This isn’t about punishing heterosexual couples who are struggling with infertility or depriving gay couples of becoming parents; this is about protecting young children and respecting their right to have a mother and father. No matter how rich, smart, or caring the parents may be, if they are creating and purchasing a child to come into the world via surrogacy, they are participating in the abuse and trauma of a baby. That is not something we should tolerate or stand for, no matter how many celebrities parade around their beautiful babies that are welcomed via surrogacy. 

Support our cause and help women reclaim their femininity by subscribing today.