Category Archive

By Tina

A few years ago, four of my friends and one relative were all having trouble getting pregnant. I was having a conversation with my mother about it when she blurted out, “You should do something to help.” And she showed me an ad on egg donation in the Chicago Tribune.

I had once looked into egg donation, but the thought of having someone else raise “my” child wasn’t something I could mentally handle. Still, I wanted to do something. There was mom again. “What about being a surrogate?” she asked. She then proceeded to remind me how well my pregnancies went and said she thought I would be a good candidate. I did my research and after some thought, I knew I could mentally handle it. Plus it was a way of giving back to those I knew were struggling to create families.

I started working with Alternative Reproductive Resources in 2005. The process to become a surrogate was more complicated than I had expected. It was stressful, but in the end, worth it. This was a big decision I was making.

I was a surrogate twice. The first time, the embryo transfer didn’t take, which was not only hard for me, but for the couple I was trying to help. Due to health issues, the couple had to focus on other needs. Nevertheless, that experience made me stronger and more motivated to help another couple.

ARR introduced me to another couple. This experience was very different – not only was I working with new parents, but a different team of doctors. In May 2007, the embryos were transferred and took. I was pregnant with twins. The feeling was overwhelming.

Throughout the pregnancy, the intended parents, ARR and my family were very supportive and on January 18, 2008, I gave the couple two very precious gifts. If it weren’t for my mother, though, I never would have had such an amazing experience. Mother does, in fact, know best!

By Tina

Being a surrogate was one of the most rewarding experiences of my life. But it put me in the position of having to make some difficult decisions – like facing the possibility of becoming pregnant with multiples and facing the issue of selective reduction.

Last year, the Washington Post, in an article titled “Too Much to Carry,” explained why selective reduction is used and how high-risk multiple pregnancies can be difficult for some women. It also told what the couples went through in choosing selective reduction, a decision that does not come lightly.

I’m not getting into the abortion debate. That is not what this is about. It is about the surrogate knowing her medical risks when carrying multiples. Remember: This is not just about the parents-to-be, it’s also about the surrogate and her health, her family and the lives she is carrying.

In these types of in vitro situations, multiples easily occur. Surrogates need to know what their bodies can handle before agreeing to carry someone else’s child – or children.

I told my intended parents that I was willing to carry twins but would do selective reduction if triplets resulted from the egg transplantation. Before making this decision, I consulted with my doctor to understand my physical limitations and risks. I was told I was too small to carry three babies to term. It would be too risky for the babies and me. (If it were up to me, I would have carried multiples.) Luckily, I got pregnant with twins and did not have to face this decision (phew!).

Discussing selective reduction is not easy. It must be discussed carefully and candidly and specified legally (read: put it in a contract) before anyone enters into any surrogacy relationship. The couple I helped was very understanding of my choice to selectively reduce if the situation called for it.

I know that selective reduction is not for everyone. It wasn’t something I would have considered, but in my case, the medical risks were too great.

How do others feel about selective reduction? If you’ve been a surrogate or an intended parent, how did you handle this issue?

By Robin von Halle

A lot of people have been paying attention to the steep rise in first-time pregnancies among some of our more mature celebrities.

A recent post on Knifestyles of the Rich and Famous, points to the amazing incidence of “multiples” among older celebs like J-Lo (38) and Garcelle Beauvais-Nilon (41), and singletons among others like Halle Berry (41), Helena Bonham Carter (41) and Nicole Kidman (40).

In fact, these geriatric pregnancies, as Oprah put it, really are miraculous: Statistically, a 40-year-old, sexually active woman has a whopping 5 percent chance of conceiving.

God love these celebrities and the children they’re bringing into the world. I just wish they’d own up to how they came about.

On one hand, is it anyone’s business whether they were conceived through ordinary means or through the assistance of a young woman who donated her fresher eggs? Taking this route to creating families is, indeed, an intensely personal decision.

On the other hand, these women are celebrities and, by definition, public figures. By owning up, they could be doing a world of good – informing others that options are available and that egg donation (not to mention gestational surrogacy) is a viable route worthy of exploring.

By Mary Ellen McLaughlin

Maybe I’m alone, but I’ve never thought of gestational surrogacy as being particularly funny. Still, the folks in Hollywood seem to think so. This spring, both a sitcom on FOX and a movie starring Tina Fey have characters who use a surrogate to have a baby.

Don’t get me wrong, I’m delighted that gestational surrogacy is getting some national attention. I just hope that it doesn’t make surrogacy seem like a quick fix for infertility. Or worse, that anyone can be a surrogate. As this article in the Columbus Dispatch points out, surrogates are required to have been pregnant before. Another flaw is that both the movie and TV show are set in New York City. But surrogacy has been illegal in New York since 1993.

The surrogates aren’t exactly terrific candidates. On the TV show “The Return of Jezebel James,” the surrogate is the main character’s sister, an unemployed former drug user who has never been pregnant. “Baby Mama,” features a surrogate who is uneducated, immature and possibly mentally unbalanced (the previews show her peeing in the sink after she can’t figure out how to lift the baby-proofed toilet seat). She also loses her apartment and shows up at the intended mother’s door. That’s not how I want to see surrogates represented. The women we match are mothers with stable home lives.

Surrogates – we’d love to hear from you! How do you feel about the way gestational surrogates are being represented by these roles?

By Robin von Halle

There’s a reason to go with a reputable agency that specializes in matching egg donors and gestational surrogates to those who are unable to bear children through traditional means. Services go beyond vetting candidates to make sure they’re on the up and up and emotionally equipped for the job. We also bring in experts to guide intended parents and donors and surrogates through the complex legal and psychological issues.

The importance of this role has been brought home through news coverage in recent months of heartbreaking situations that have arisen when couples have followed a do-it-yourself path.

Back in October, the Today Show did a story on Tom and Gwyn Lamitina, a Florida couple who fought for but lost custody of their daughter who was born by a surrogate they had hired who decided to keep the baby. Since then, the couple has filed a civil case accusing the surrogate mother of fraud – saying she produced a “litany of lies and dreadful acts of deceit.”

Two months later FOX News told the story of a South Carolina woman accused of promising couples she would be their surrogate – who exploited at least six people out of $14,000.

An agency with a proven track record and references supporting it will help intended parents offset the risks that can be involved with this process. The good ones will provide psychological screening of surrogates, legal representation for all parties and a support system for all those involved.

Caveat emptor is, unfortunately, the operative phrase when people show no qualms to take advantage of couples who are desperate to create families, leaving them financially strung out and without a child.

By Robin von Halle

Are you a 5′9” or taller Caucasian female, who is between 18 and 30 years of age, very attractive, college educated and athletic with no genetic medical issues? If so, an ad in the Stanford University Daily promises to pay you $100,000 for an egg donation.

Frankly, I’d find such advertising amusing if it didn’t cross a dangerous ethical line - treating human life like a commodity. No wonder some people think we’re in the business of selling “designer genes.”

When agencies compensate egg donors based on SAT scores, athletic trophies and beauty pageants, it sends a negative message about fertility practices. That’s why we at ARR felt it was so important to adopt a code of ethics and to promote that code on behalf of our entire industry.

Our code of ethics calls for compensating egg donors and gestational surrogates solely for their time, effort and inconvenience, in keeping with the American Society of Reproductive Medicine (ASRM) guidelines. There are no premiums for blue eyes or Ivy League degrees.

We hope others in our industry will join us by embracing similar ethical standards. The world should know we’re in the business of helping build families, not auctioning off genetic matter to the highest bidder.

By Sara

After seven years of trying to have a baby on our own, my husband and I decided to use a surrogate. Today, she is a dear friend.

When I first met our surrogate (and her husband), it was as if we had known each other for years. They were open and friendly and within five minutes of meeting, we were laughing. It felt so comfortable, and we were in sync on so many issues concerning the surrogacy.

We spoke on the phone every day, sometimes for hours. She would call me with any kind of “baby news” and I attended all of the doctors’ appointments. She really brought me into the pregnancy. Our relationship grew to be so much more than just surrogate and intended parent.

One reason our relationship worked so well was because I let go and trusted her. When my husband and I first found out she was pregnant, she wanted to throw us a party. At the same time she was spotting, which an be normal. I was a nervous wreck, worried something was going to happen (seven miscarriages will do that). She assured me she was fine and would sit the whole time. I knew she would never do anything to jeopardize the pregnancy.

Today, we have two beautiful boys, and my relationship with our surrogate has not changed. We don’t talk every day, but we try to at least once a month. And when we do, it’s just like old times (we talk for hours). We also get together when we can.

This is one of the best experiences of my life. My husband and I got the family we longed for, along with new, lifelong friends.

By Robin von Halle

I wasn’t sure I was hearing the prospective client right, so I repeated what I thought I’d heard back to her: “You want us to find a surrogate to have your child, not because you can’t have one yourself, but because you’re too busy with your job to undertake a pregnancy yourself?”

Indeed, I was hearing her right and was no less astounded at the words coming out of my mouth as I was when they came from hers. This woman wanted a child created from a no muss, no fuss pregnancy. That meant someone else doing all the heavy lifting (and carrying).

It’s not the first such request we’ve gotten. We also recently turned down another woman who was looking at surrogacy as a happy alternative to losing her figure. And we recently read in People of former dance-pop star Taylor Dayne’s single parenthood through surrogacy (”Some women love being pregnant, but I didn’t need that.”).

When we turn such people down, they inevitably fail to appreciate our philosophy, which we underscore in our code of ethics. It isn’t the money issue, but that our donors and surrogates are a valuable - and valued - commodity. Our agency partners with them to help those who have no other viable options. Not to facilitate vanity pregnancies.

By Robin von Halle

When most of us hear the phrase, “fertility vacation,” we think of a tropical destination where couples can get away from stress, relax for a week or two, and come home pregnant.

There’s been a lot of talk lately about another kind of fertility vacation, where intended parents travel to a more surrogacy- or egg donation-friendly state, or sometimes, to another country for in-vitro solutions to creating families. A CBC News article describes how a Canadian law prohibiting compensation for egg donors is driving couples across the border, taking their vacation time to work with agencies in the U.S.

In Canada, it’s not against the law for women to sell their eggs, only to buy them. That really limits a couple’s options: if in-vitro doesn’t work, and they can’t find a relative or friend to donate eggs without compensation, they are only left with adoption as a legal option.

Certainly, the U.S. isn’t perfect - several states don’t allow compensation for gestational surrogacy, including Indiana, Michigan and New York. Illinois, on the other hand, is especially surrogacy-friendly because, among other reasons, it allows intended parents to be on the baby’s birth certificate immediately following birth.

Until the overall environment becomes friendlier to egg donation and gestational surrogacy, a fertility vacation is an intriguing solution. Interestingly, we also are starting to get calls from couples from Australia and European countries with restrictive laws on both fronts who are looking to “vacation” in Chicago to get their fertility treatment underway.