By Lila Rose
While pregnant, Brittney received a breast cancer diagnosis & decided to deliver the baby early at 25 weeks so she could receive chemo treatment while giving the child a possible chance of survival. She said her thought was, “I want to keep this baby safe & bring it earthside.”
But the purchasing couple didn’t want to pay Brittney for a baby born before 38 weeks due to the potential health problems of a premature baby.
They demanded the baby be “immediately terminated.”
When Brittney refused to kill the baby, they threatened legal action. When she offered to adopt the child, they demanded a death certificate. Brittney has described her experience as a surrogate as feeling like “a rented-out uterus.”
Surrogacy laws in California gave no rights to Brittney or the baby. She was able to deliver the baby at 25 weeks, but the purchasing couple had “ownership” of the child after birth. They ordered that life-saving care be withheld.
The baby boy died shortly after birth.
While it appears Brittney tried to protect this child in the womb, her participation in surrogacy played a partial role in the ultimate death of this little boy.
From his moment of conception, he was stripped of his fundamental rights & treated as a product that could be discarded at the first sign of defect.
Lila Rose closes her thread with this:
Surrogacy is fundamentally wrong.
It enables people to act as if they are entitled to other people’s reproductive abilities – the body of the woman whose womb they are renting. It also treats children like property to be bought, sold, and killed.
This case is just another example of why.
Whether you agree in whole or in part with Lila Rose regarding Surrogacy, she sheds light on a real life scenario that truly is an injustice.
PLEASE SHARE ON SOCIAL MEDIA AND SUPPORT A FREE AND INDEPENDENT PRESS.
