The last eighteen months have been tough for international surrogacy facilitators and agents. In the wake of several high profile cases, India has continued to tighten its restrictions on surrogacy. Thailand closed its doors in 2014 although the case of Baby Carmen continues to highlight the danger of surrogacy in a place where the legal framework is evolving. An earthquake in Nepal didn't slow them down, but the Supreme Court in Nepal has put a moratorium on surrogacy. The news from Mexico has not been encouraging.
Of all the possible locations on the planet to descend upon for surrogacy, where are the international facilitators and agencies going now?
Cambodia.
As a wise man once said, I'm not making this up.
Let's see what the US State Department (link) has to say about traveling to Cambodia.
On Crime:
"Cambodia has a high crime rate, including street crime. Military weapons
and explosives are readily available to criminals despite authorities’
efforts to collect and destroy such weapons. Armed robberies occur
frequently, and foreign residents and visitors, including U.S. citizens,
are among the victims. The Embassy has also received reports that hotel
rooms of U.S. citizen visitors in Phnom Penh were burglarized while the
occupants were asleep."
"Local police rarely investigate reports of crime against tourists, and
travelers should not expect to recover stolen items. It has also been
reported that some police stations charge foreigners between $20 and
$100 to file a police report."
The concept of someone breaking into my hotel room while I'm sleeping is creepy to say the least, the idea of this happening in a room where my newborn infant is sleeping is horrifying. That's saying nothing about the military-grade weapons that are easily accessible.
On LGBT Rights:
"While there are no legal restrictions on same-sex sexual relations or
the organization of LGBT events in Cambodia, public attitudes remain
negative towards LBGT individuals, and same sex marriage is generally
not permitted. There have been no reports of arrests or violence related
to LBGT travelers."
The fact that there have not been reports of arrests or violence related to LGBT travelers may seem encouraging, however the cultural climate of negativity towards the LGBT community is concerning. What is more concerning is that despite several cases of LGBT parents experiencing legal issues in non tolerant countries, that facilitators and agencies continue to bring their clients to places where their rights are not recognized and protected.
Most importantly, this is what the US State Department says on on Health:
"Medical facilities and services in Cambodia do not meet international
standards. Both Phnom Penh and Siem Reap have a limited number of
internationally-run clinics and hospitals that can provide basic medical
care and stabilization. Medical care outside of these two cities is
almost non-existent. Local pharmacies provide a limited supply of
prescription and over-the-counter medications, but because the quality
of locally obtained medications can vary greatly, make sure to bring a
supply of your medications that is adequate for the duration of your
stay in Cambodia. You should be wary of purchasing local medication.
Counterfeit medication is readily available, often indiscernible from
authentic medication, and potentially lethal."
Even if we were to ignore everything else, what about the above paragraph indicates that Cambodia is a safe and appropriate place to conduct a surrogacy? By definition, surrogate pregnancies are considered high risk. The increased risk of multiple pregnancy and prematurity make access to high quality health care critical for the safety and wellbeing of babies.
Likely, if you point this out to one of the facilitators or agents currently touting Cambodia as the next great option for international surrogacy they will tell you that "their" doctors and clinics are state of the art. Given that they make thousands of dollars from IPs with absolutely zero accountability for outcomes, I suppose it's not surprising that they would minimize the risk. Disappointing, but not surprising. I mean really.... who cares what the State Department has to say as long as the facilitators "feel" good about it.
Families through Surrogacy's website has the following to say about surrogacy in Cambodia:
Note: The Cambodian surrogate retains parental rights under the law. While facilitators may feel comfortable minimizing the risk that this poses to intended parents, one only has to look at the current Baby Carmen case to see just how dangerous ignoring the legal rights of the surrogate is.
As always, we urge all hopeful IPs to consider the risks to everyone involved when it comes to weighing your options, no matter how desperate you may feel. As has been said here before, where your baby will be born is the first decision you will make that could have serious and/or long-lasting repercussions on your baby's health. As the first anniversary of my twins' birth and my son's death quickly approaches, I remember how we were reassured repeatedly that our surrogate was receiving the absolute best care possible, and that my twins would have access to the same level of healthcare as they would in a regional medical center in the United States. My wife and I believed what we had been told repeatedly by our facilitator, and it wasn't until we received conflicting information in the wake of the premature birth that our facilitator admitted that she wasn't a medical professional.
As a matter of fact, none of them are.
None of them are legal experts in any of the numerous countries they have churned through over the last almost two years, either. There is no possible way any of them could become legal experts on surrogacy in country after country after country.
None of them are fluent in the local language, and I find it implausible that any of them could have become experts in the local customs and cultural practices in the very limited amount of time that they spend there before declaring a program "open for business."
Yet they routinely present themselves to desperate intended parents as being experts who are able to determine whether a hospital, clinic, or even an entire country is an appropriate and safe place to bring a newborn into the world.
Showing posts with label Surrogacy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Surrogacy. Show all posts
Monday, October 19, 2015
The Flavor of the Month - Written by Drew
Tuesday, September 8, 2015
Surrogacy in Mexico Resource
One of the few unbiased sources on the state of surrogacy in Mexico can be found on Facebook. This page is managed by the only person I know of who talks about surrogacy in Mexico, but who does not make money off of doing so. A few of her recent blog posts include discussions on:
The articles include information on how Mexican law has been violated (commercial surrogacy in Mexico is NOT legal no matter how many times people try to play semantic games like "recatagorizing income"), allegations of surrogate mistreatment and bribery.
This page has extensive information for intended parents regarding the evolving situation in Mexico.
Wednesday, June 10, 2015
Saturday, April 25, 2015
Surrogacy in Nepal: International Surrogacy Disaster
One of the families currently stranded in Nepal with their newborns
Today our thoughts and prayers are with the surrogates, babies and intended parents who have been impacted by the terrible earthquake in Nepal. There are reports of several Israeli families with premature babies who are trying to get out of the country. I can only imagine how scared and worried they are as they try to keep their fragile babies safe.
One of the primary reservations I had when people first began touting Nepal as the next location for international surrogacy was the fragility of infrastructure in the country. For years experts have been warning about the danger to the area from earthquake, especially given that in recent years construction has been largely unregulated. Even prior to the quake, Nepal's medical infrastructure was fragile, not a single hospital in the country was accredited by the International Joint Commission on patient safety. Now those facilities are overcrowded and running short on emergency supplies, and morgues are running out of space. BIR hospital is reported to be treating people in the streets.
Hours after the quake, the death toll is already above 1500. However, surviving the initial quake and its aftershocks is only the first hurdle that must be overcome. The country is highly dependent on hydroelectric power plants, it's not yet clear what damage they have sustained. Interruptions to the power grid are not unusual in Katmandu, so many people and businesses have generators, however, given the significant damage to roads moving fuel to where it is needed is going to be very difficult.
I doubt that fertility clinics are going to be given first priority for allocation of what is likely going to be a scarce commodity. This could have grave consequences not only for surrogates in housing, but for the thousands of embryos imported there in recent months.
Cholera is a regular problem in Nepal, one which could easily become epidemic given the difficulty in maintaining clean water and adequate sanitation after a disaster of this magnitude.
When people advertise they are experts at surrogacy in a third world country the implication they are giving to intended parents is that they are prepared for the worst. Unfortunately, as has been seen repeatedly, many of the so called "experts" are little more than expensive glorified travel agents with little to know understanding of the challenges that may be faced even under the best of conditions. I have zero faith have the ability to truly help intended parents under conditions like these.
Thursday, March 12, 2015
Kim Waters Hendrix & Complete Surrogacy Solutions Review and Complaint: Client Confidentiality
As I’ve written before, client confidentiality is a fundamental part of any professional surrogacy agency, facilitator, etc… Surrogacy facilitators have access to financial information, medical information and are frequently given significant amounts of personal information by their clients.
There were many times during my relationship with Kim where she shared information with me, that in retrospect was inappropriate. I should not know about the couple who had to terminate their much wanted pregnancy at 13 weeks due to fetal abnormality, nor should I know anything about the sperm quality of several of my Facebook friends.
That’s why when I found out that Kim was sharing my information with other people I wasn’t surprised. Hurt, yes. Surprised? No. One of the first people to let me know that this was going on was Paul McDavy. Frankly, if he had been the only one and it had been an isolated issue, I probably would not be writing this post today.
Posting information (and inaccurate information at that) about our struggle to get records on my Facebook wall? Not appropriate. Sharing even more information with a prospective client? Not professional.
I confronted her about this in January:
One would have thought that this would have ended the matter. However, it's very clear now that this pattern- which was going on throughout our pregnancy and after our son died has continued.
She admits that she knew John wasn't well, although she and Bakshi repeatedly assured Drew and I that no oxygen deprivation had taken place. Additionally, she fails to share that while she offered to go to Delhi it was with the understanding that Drew and I were footing the bill.
Sharing details of our financial situation is not appropriate. Additionally, we were being told that Adiva was a good hospital, there was no oxygen deprivation and no reason to move him unless we wanted to do so for the sake of doing it. Given the information we had at time we made the decision to leave John where he was until I got there. Had we been told that Adiva was not qualified to care for him, we would have moved him, regardless of cost.
Kim had absolutely no right to share the ongoing issues we were having in terms of getting the records or my other concerns.
John died of HIE and Klebsiella pneumonia. HIE is not genetic, nor is pneumonia. HIE is caused by oxygen deprivation at birth. Secondly, the genetic issue that our six year old has is not carried on the Y chromosome, it's maternally inherited...which is why we used an egg donor. Lastly, it is absolutely unfathomable that any person calling themselves a professional would feel this kind of disclosure is appropriate.
I am also aware that Kim has also emailed clients, sharing her version of our tragedy and requesting that those clients give her positive reviews. The fact that she has recruited other "professionals" not involved with our case to help her do this is even more disturbing. While it's certainly her right to ask people for testimonials, the fact that she is continuing to share our personal, private information, despite our repeated requests that she not do so is disgusting.
Wednesday, March 4, 2015
Complete Surrogacy Solutions: You had ONE JOB - by Drew
I’ve been an IT professional for almost 10 years now. I’ve been in my current job for a little over
a year, and its been a new experience for me, as I’ve moved into a sysadmin
role. I very much enjoy my job, and I’d
like to think I’m doing well in it. If
someone comes to me with a problem, I am straightforward about my ability to
fix it, as well as how much time I think it’ll take. If I misrepresent either, I’m not only making
myself look bad, but my whole team’s appearance suffers. In a similar vein, when dealing with vendor
support teams, I need to be honest about my knowledge and experience in order
for them to best know how to assist me.
If I were to claim I knew more than I did, I’d actually impede the
process of resolving my problem.
When the disasters with our travel visas and our twins’
birth happened, I don’t doubt that on some level, Kim believes she did
everything she could to help us. The
ultimate reality is she accomplished nothing that helped us. One reason for this is that I believe that
Kim, for all of her projected confidence, amiability, bluster, and bravado,
doesn’t have any influence on the actual surrogacy process. At the very least, she doesn’t have as much
as she thinks she does. Here is how I
came to this conclusion.
Point 1 - Kim did not seem to have any substantial
relationships with the professionals in India, and didn’t appear to have invested
in the ones she may have had.
Until she went there
after we’d returned home, Kim hadn’t traveled to India since the birth of her
‘nephews’ back in May of 2013. We know
this, because said so on her Facebook page.
At the very least, despite promising us that she would, she never
visited India while our surrogate was pregnant.
As a result, she never saw the conditions at Adiva Hospital. If she had, one would think that different
decisions about Adiva’s/Bakshi’s viability as a partner would have been made
well before we became her actual
clients.
In all fairness, Kim
did communicate with Bakshi’s office via Skype.
I know this happened at least once, as she was on a Skype call with them
at the same time that I was at Bakshi’s clinic filling out our initial
paperwork in November of 2014, and I saw her myself. Even if that happened on a regular basis, if
she never traveled there herself, she missed out on a tremendous opportunity to
cultivate personal and professional relationships.
There are loads
of articles out there that talk about the commuting vs. telecommuting debate
that many businesses contend with on a regular basis. As an IT professional, I get asked about it,
and contend with it, frequently. I have
a very pleasant working relationship with my colleague in Delhi, but I had only
ever talked to him over Skype. While I
was in Delhi in October, though, I managed to meet him for the first time, took
a tour of the Delhi office, and met a few of the other people who work
there. I thoroughly enjoyed doing
so. No longer was “the Delhi office”
just a conceptual place to me, I could picture it. I felt much more connected to my colleague,
and he and I were able to talk about things that didn’t have anything to do
with the work that we did together. That
deepened and broadened our relationship.
Seeing the responses
and reactions that Kim’s emails to Bakshi and her staff received as compared to
ours, I didn’t see any real difference.
As far as we could tell, Kim seemed to be just another American emailing
them with questions. Skype is a great
tool to promote connectivity with business entities in remote locations, but
without that personal touch - meeting them in person, shaking their hand,
exchanging pleasantries, etc. - a relationship can only be built so far. Only so much a rapport can really be established. Even though she was a facilitator, Kim didn’t
seem to have any more of a relationship with Dr. Bakshi and her staff than we
did in the beginning.
Point 2 - Kim never took an active role in our surrogacy
journey
Once we’d signed on
with her, Kim sent us several documents about packages, pricing, etc. One of them was a pre-natal schedule, which
supposedly outlined when our surrogate would have checkups, ultrasounds, and
the like. Once we were pregnant, it
seemed our entire lives revolved around how far along we were, and how long
that meant we had to wait until we got the next ultrasound pictures.
Almost right off the
bat, we had to ask Kim when the next scheduled scan was going to take place and
why there were delays. It didn’t take us
long to stop going through Kim entirely and ask Dr. Bakshi directly about the
scans. As a facilitator, Kim’s job was
supposed to be preventing us from having to do that.
We were entirely
focused on the ultrasounds, as they were the only link we had to our developing
twins. As the IPs, this should be
entirely unsurprising. In retrospect,
however, this was a mistake on our part.
We should have realized that if we had to chase after the clinic to
perform ultrasounds on schedule, then who knows what was going on with our
surrogate’s checkups? We eventually did
get the medical records for our surrogate, but by then all the damage was
done. Had we asked for these records during
the pregnancy, we could have voiced our concerns about Mrs. S’s rising blood
pressure and anemia. Rhy did voice some concerns about Mrs. S’s
risk of developing gestational diabetes, but was shamed into silence. This happened more than once. While it would have been good for Kim and Dr.
Bakshi to at least hear out her concerns, it would have been ideal for them to
have been proactively addressed.
But again, this was
supposed to be Kim’s job as our facilitator to ask for and obtain those records. By being the one who was supposed to monitor
the surrogate’s health status, she was supposed to be allowing us to focus on
those precious ultrasound pictures.
Instead, all we got were assurances that we were having the ‘picture
perfect’ twin pregnancy. Basic
monitoring of our surrogate’s health should have made it quite clear that this
was not the case.
Another set of
promises that Kim made to us was that she could help us get what we needed
during our stay in Delhi. She had
supposedly negotiated a special rate for her clients at the Hilton Garden Inn. She had a deal with a local driver and his
fleet. Her package and pricing material
even claimed that she would get us an Indian cellphone. While we remarked to her at the time that an
Indian cellphone would be considered quite valuable when we traveled there, we
never heard any offer or mention of it again.
We did not initially
stay at the Hilton when we arrived in Delhi.
My colleague at work recommended one that my fellow Seattle-based
employees stay at when they travel to Delhi.
While it was very close to Adiva Hospital, it wasn’t as good a hotel as
the Hilton was supposed to be. So we
asked Kim to help us make arrangements for her reduced rate at the Hilton for
the remainder of our stay. It was then
that we learned that her ‘contact,’ with whom she’d supposedly negotiated the
reduced rate for her clients, had left the Hilton for another job, and had left
some number of months prior to our arrival.
This is something that, if she were actively managing her relationships
in India, she would have known well in advance of our arrival. So in the end, we had to pay full price.
Before we even left
for Delhi, Kim asked Rhy to check in on another couple’s surrogate for
her. Personally, the fact that she had
the gall to ask that of us infuriated me.
Our son, after all, had just died.
Rhy, however, was smart - Given that we were already upset with the
level of effort Kim had put out on our behalf, if she checked on this
surrogate, then that couple could be assured of a thorough, honest evaluation
of the surrogate’s condition. In
exchange for Rhy essentially doing Kim’s job for her, Kim offered to pay for
one of our nights at the Hilton. Even
then, she’d only made those arrangements after I reminded her to do so twice.
She also gave us no
assistance with obtaining our exit visas, despite that being one of the most
important parts of her self-written job description. The documents we’d need, the steps we’d have
to take once we’d arrived at the FRRO, even the appointment itself were all
arranged by Poonam Jain, a consultant in Delhi who has helped many intended
parents leave India with their babies, and someone who had worked in the US
consulate for many years. Thanks to her,
we were able to get in and out of the FRRO with our exit visas in about 2 hours. All we had heard from Kim on this subject
were horror stories she’d read about online, which involved couples forced to
make multiple trips to the FRRO over several days, and in some cases
weeks. “Try to stay calm and give them
whatever they ask for,” comprises the sum of her ‘advice’ to us.
While we were at the
FRRO, we learned that the rules had changed regarding medical visas for
surrogacy that required us to register with the FRRO upon our arrival. We didn’t know this, and because the rule
change came so close to our arrival, the FRRO agents allowed us to leave
despite this oversight. I understand
that rules can change often, but rules such as these are ones that Kim should
have been keeping extremely close track of.
Despite us informing her of these changes, she did not pass this information
on to another pair of intended parents, and as a result, they had multiple
issues obtaining their exit visas, one of which was caused by this rule change.
Conclusion: Kim would seem to have very little to no
influence in India.
When Johnny died the
day before Rhy’s flight to Delhi was set to depart, we sent multiple emails to
Kim, the US Consulate, and Dr. Bakshi’s team, pleading with them to save a lock
of his hair, or take a handprint or footprint for us, as they would serve to be
the only physical link we’d have to his 10 days of life. We have since learned that the way Indian
culture handles the death of a child/infant is much different than the way it
is handled here in the US, both from a medical and cultural standpoint. To judge another culture through the lens of
one’s own is the height of ignorance, so I want to make clear that this is NOT
what we are doing. Given that, though, I
would presume that one would be hard pressed to find someone, regardless of
cultural background, that would find our request unreasonable. Yet when Kim made our request to Dr. Bakshi
and her staff on our behalf, the answer we received is that it simply could not
be done. While we were never told why
this was the case, here is what I see this is a symptom of, and the point that
I have been building towards for the last 3 pages.
Kim was a
facilitator who was sending intended parents to Dr. Bakshi’s clinic. In short, Kim was supposedly helping Dr.
Bakshi make quite a bit of money. Kim appeared
to only maintain digital lines of communication with her, and did not
participate actively in the surrogacies that she was responsible for. As a result, despite the basis of their
relationship, it would seem that Dr. Bakshi did not see her relationship with
Kim to be important enough to warrant a departure from the standard procedure,
even in the event of a premature infant’s death.
I understand and am fully aware that India is a very
different country than the United States, and has a very different way of doing
things. At the same time, advertising
yourself as a surrogacy facilitator in a country in which you have no ability
to take or influence real actionis, at best, foolhardy. At worst, it is reckless and dangerous. Kim boasted to us early on in the process
that if we were disappointed in Bakshi in any way, Kim would call her up and
‘read her the Riot Act.’ She claimed
that she did this several times over the course of our pregnancy, yet we didn’t
see Dr. Bakshi’s or her staff’s behavior change at all over time. Had Kim actually had any of the influence she
claimed to have, she could have prevented the death of our son and the
infection of our daughter with an STD.
At the absolute minimum, she could have avoided having a set of grieving
parents end up with no physical remembrance of their son, which is one of the
worst things for the grieving parents of an infant to have inflicted upon them. We continue to hope that no set of parents
ever experiences anything like this as a result of trusting someone they
shouldn’t have.
Tuesday, February 3, 2015
Surrogate medical care matters..
Drew and I choose to have a "facilitator" involved not once, but twice because we knew we didn't have the ability to effectively vet and monitor a clinic on the other side of the planet. Our facilitator told us that she traveled to India frequently to check on surrogates and make that they were being well taken care of. During the entire year we were involved with her, she made trips to Thailand and Mexico. She did not travel to India during our surrogate's pregnancy. When she finally went there after one of her trips to Thailand, we were appalled to find out that it was the first time she had been since the birth of her nephews- who were almost two years old.
Prenatal care is absolutely critical to the health and safety of babies. We were assured repeatedly that our surrogate would have the absolute best care. Unfortunately, it doesn't appear that was the case.
A cursory look at our surrogate's medical records indicates that she was tested for iron deficiency on four different occasions. On three of those occasions, she tested as anemic. Despite those test results and despite the fact that she was complaining of dizziness and fatigue, there is no evidence in the chart that this was ever treated. Anemia in pregnancy increases the risk of post-partum hemorrhage which can be fatal. It's also dangerous to the developing fetus and increases the risk of developmental delay.
Despite supplementation, which started when I arrived in India, Maizy was anemic at her first pediatrician appointment in the US. Our pediatrician says this is an indication of just how anemic she was at birth. Her pediatrician believes that her anemia may have contributed to her seizure. Only time will tell if she will experience developmental delay as a result. This was entirely preventable.
In the beginning of the pregnancy, our surrogate had low to normal blood pressure. However, from twenty weeks on it appears that her blood pressure rose steadily at each appointment. By the time she delivered the twins, the hospital records indicate that she had pre-eclampsia. The chart indicates that Mrs. S was complaining of dizziness, headache and visual disturbance. Despite these clear indications, the clinic did not do a 24 hour urine collection, which would have confirmed the diagnosis. While she was observed in the hospital overnight at one point there is no indication that they did anything other than give her some fluids. Pre-clampsia is a very serious medical condition - left untreated it can result in seizures, stroke and even death. It seems that they did nothing other than record the fact that this was happening. The fact that our surrogate survived appears to be a result of luck more than anything else. When we confronted our facilitator and the doctor about this, they denied that it was a problem.
We were not the only clients who were concerned that our facilitator had not made the promised trips to India for surrogate monitoring. When these concerns were brought up to her, she became very defensive and angry and talked about how she needed to make her family a priority.
If Mrs. S was the only surrogate whose health and safety was put into jeopardy, I could understand why someone might think that our situation was an aberration. Unfortunately, I know that this is not the case. I can't speculate as to why a facilitator would continue to refer clients to a clinic where two clients in three months experienced serious complications for their surrogates and their babies. I don't want to believe that the referral fees are what motivated her, perhaps she genuinely believes that this care was appropriate.
We wanted an independent facilitator because we wanted someone to advocate not only for our family, but also for our surrogate. Our facilitator and our doctor likely feel very differently about our journey than we do. Regardless of how anyone feels the facts are this:
•My surrogate had more than one health condition that was not managed appropriately
•My daughter has ongoing health issues directly related to those issues, her prematurity and the facility where she was born.
•My son died.
As an aside, another surrogacy facilitator, not the one we used, threatened to take legal action against me because she didn't like what I've said on this blog. For the record, nothing I have said here constitutes libel or slander.
She also told me "Your blog does NOT paint you in a positive light."
My child died. The last thing on my mind is what other people think of me. Lastly- bullying a grieving mother says a hell of a lot more about you than it does her.
Monday, January 12, 2015
Professional Standards for International Surrogacy Professionals: Part 2 Qualifications and Conflict of Interest
My husband and I chose to use a surrogacy facilitator not once, but twice. One of the primary reasons we made that choice was the recognition of our limitations in terms of evaluating a medical facility on the other side of the planet. In retrospect, we should have recognized that those same limitations applied to the facilitator.
Most international surrogacy agents do not have degrees in the health care field; it’s probably not reasonable to expect them to. However, absent accreditation by a credible third party like the International Joint Commission, it seems unlikely that the average layperson has the ability to evaluate doctors or facilities in a foreign country. Given our experience, a hospital that does not adhere to the standards set by the joint commission is not a hospital I would feel comfortable using for high risk pregnancies or infants. To find out if a hospital meets these standards, click here.
The fact that a medical facility has a nice website or that it “looks” clean doesn’t mean that it adheres to international standards for patient safety.
At the same time, if a facility cannot maintain the most basic standards for cleanliness, it seems extremely unlikely they would have the capacity to prevent the spread of infection. In a country like India, where antibiotic resistant bacteria kill fifty-eight thousand babies every year it should be obvious why this is critically important.
The second and equally concerning issue is the conflict of interest in the relationship between facilitators and clinics. Facilitators frequently receive referral fees from the doctor/clinic. This is problematic for reasons that I think are pretty clear. At the very least, transparency would seem to require that this relationship be disclosed.
There are hospitals in New Delhi that meet the standards set by the Joint Commission. Again, you can find them here. I would not feel safe using a doctor who delivered at a hospital that did not meet these standards. If my agency or facilitator was recommending that I go forward with surrogacy in a country where there were no facilities accredited by the International Joint Commission, knowing what I know now, I would not be comfortable taking that risk with my baby.
Losing a child is one of the single most devastating things that has ever happened to my family. Sharing our experience has opened me up to vitriol from strangers and from people I used to call friends. I’ve been threatened with legal retaliation and told that this blog “does not paint me in a positive light.” What those people don’t seem to understand is this: My beloved son died. The last thing I’m worried about is other people’s opinions. Frankly, I don't deserve to be painted in a positive light because I failed my son by being arrogant enough to think that I had the ability to protect him from half a world away. Telling my story isn’t easy. It shouldn't be, but it’s the only way I can think of to say this:
“Johnny, Mommy is so very, very sorry.”
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)











