Bee a Parent as a Gay Individual Couple | Circle Surrogacy & Egg Donatn

Contents:

• SURROGACY FOR GAY PARENTS, COUNTRY BY COUNTRY
• GAY MEN AND SURROGACY
• SURROGACY FOR GAY COUPL
• PROCREATIVE NSCNS A GLOBAL MARKET: GAY MEN'S PATHS TO SURROGACY THE USA
• ‘WE ARE EXPECTED TO BE OK WH NOT HAVG CHILDREN’: HOW GAY PARENTHOOD THROUGH SURROGACY BEME A BATTLEGROUND

SURROGACY FOR GAY PARENTS, COUNTRY BY COUNTRY

Alongsi their creasg visibily is a burgeong body of rearch on gay fathers, specifilly on the hort of gay men who beme parents after g out rather than the ntext of a prev heterosexual relatnship (see Berkowz & Marsigl, 2007; Carone, Bac, & Lgiardi, 2017; Goldberg, 2010a; Greenfeld & Seli, 2011; Lew, 2009; Petersen, 2018; Stacey, 2006).

GAY MEN AND SURROGACY

Th, viewg gay fathers’ volvement wh their children through the lens illumat the fluidy of fay, genr, and of the work on sexual mory parentg has been spearhead by femist scholars who have long challenged “the iology of the monolhic fay and the notn that any one fay arrangement is natural, blogil, or functnal a timels way” (Goldberg & Allen, 2007, p.

Takg serly the terlockg systems of privilege and opprsn the lived experienc of gay fathers who e surrogacy illumat how the men’s class, race, and Wtern privilege allows them to buy their way out of discrimatory adoptive polici and stake out a 9-month lease on a surrogate mother’s womb orr to nstct a geilly related, and sometim a geilly engeered, child (Dillaway, 2008) newer terdisciplary rearch has ground analys munitn, fay strs, and child velopment theori to nceptualize how gay men make cisns about surrogacy and to better unrstand the experience of surrogate fai for gay fathers and their children. For example, one study ed uncertaty rctn theory (URT), a amework that theoriz how munitn patterns among partners n be ed to rce uncertaty as they form imprsns wh one another and to explore how gay-tend fathers munited wh potential surrogate mothers and egg donors on an onle fom (May & Tenzek, 2016) of this new lerature has even moved beyond theorizg the surrogacy procs to clu thoughtful analys about the experienc of raisg children gay surrogate fai.

SURROGACY FOR GAY COUPL

Another study that explored the adjtment of children born to gay fathers through surrogacy ground their rearch a velopmental ntextual systems approach (Overton, 2015), whereby they examed children’s velopment terms of the bidirectnal relatns between the children, the fay, and the wir social world (Golombok et al., 2018) Fathers Usg SurrogacySurrogacy is an assisted reproductive technology (ART) which the prospective parent(s) fe a ntract wh a woman to rry their child (Bergman, Rub, Green, & Padron, 2010). In a study of terviews wh gay fathers about their motivatns to pursue surrogacy, the overwhelmg majory (36 out of 40) opted for a gtatnal over geic surrogacy arrangement, and half of the men chose to do so bee they felt that there was a greater risk that the arrangement would fail if the surrogate had a geic lk to the baby (Blake et al., 2017). The other most popular reason gay men mentned for this choice was that gtatnal surrogacy was remend to them by their agency, a fdg that expos how the stutnalized attus of agenci n profoundly fluence gay men’s dividual cisn-makg around surrogacy (Blake et al., 2017) men’s experience wh the surrogacy procs is mediated by other stutns as well.

PROCREATIVE NSCNS A GLOBAL MARKET: GAY MEN'S PATHS TO SURROGACY THE USA

Nohels, the body of rearch on gay fathers and surrogacy has documented a wi range of dimensns, cludg gay men’s motivatns for havg a child through surrogacy (Blake et al., 2017), the cisn-makg procs volved their path to parenthood (Blake et al., 2017), the transn to parenthood (Bergman et al., 2010; Greenfeld & Seli, 2011), relatnships wh potential and actual surrogat and egg donors (Carone et al., 2018; Greenfeld & Seli, 2011; May & Tenzek, 2016), cisns about disclosg rmatn about surrogat and donors to their children (Carone et al., 2018), the divisn of hoehold labor among bgeic and non-bgeic fathers (Tornello et al., 2015), parental adjtment (Van Rijn-van Gelren et al., 2018), children’s psychologil adjtment (Bac et al., 2015; Golombok et al., 2018; Green et al., 2015), sgle gay men and surrogacy (Carone et al., 2017), and gay men’s experienc wh transnatnal mercial surrogacy (Petersen, 2018). It is worth notg that a signifint strength of this rearch is that is beg produced by a diverse group of ternatnal scholars, cludg but not limed to the USA, the UK, the Netherlands, Spa, and addn to the studi is a handful of empiril qualative studi on gay fathers that have clud men who beme fathers through surrogacy their sampl (Berkowz, 2007; Berkowz & Marsigl, 2007; Mchell & Green, 2007; Ryan & Berkowz, 2009; Stacey, 2006).

‘WE ARE EXPECTED TO BE OK WH NOT HAVG CHILDREN’: HOW GAY PARENTHOOD THROUGH SURROGACY BEME A BATTLEGROUND

This requir fancg the participatn of the egg donor, the servic of both an egg donor agency and a surrogate agency, IVF physician servic, and health surance to ver all high sts of surrogacy mean that is only an optn for a small number of relatively affluent gay men, a fact that is illtrated by the mographic posn of the participants any of the empiril studi that clud rmatn about e.

In Petersen’s (2018) study of gay men Denmark who had ed transnatnal surrogacy, all were Whe, and a multatnal study nducted the UK, Denmark, and France, 96% of the Brish and Dutch parents were Whe (no race rmatn was llected on French parents) (Van Rijn-van Gelren et al., 2018) gay fathers the sampl are also different om gay men who bee parents through adoptn terms of their racial and ethnic diversy. Thkg About Parentg: Surrogacy as an OptnRearch has documented that gay men bee parents for many of the same reasons as heterosexual men: Both ce the sire for nurturg children, the nstancy of children their liv, the achievement of some sense of immortaly via children, and the sense of fay that children help to provi (Berkowz & Marsigl, 2007; Goldberg et al., 2012; Mallon, 2004).

Oftentim, those gay men who choose surrogacy are motivated by the higher gree of ntrol they have the procs when pared wh adoptn, feel that the prence of a geic lk to their child is an important factor for the creatn of fay ti, and worry about the psychologil strs a child may experience as a rult of beg adopted (Blake et al., 2017; Carone et al., 2017; Goldberg, 2010a; Lev, 2006). It is th not surprisg that the prence of a geic relatnship is an oft-ced reason that gay men choose surrogacy (Lev, 2006) Fay Tree: Gay Fathers, Surrogate Mothers, Egg Donors, and Their ChildrenSurrogacy is siar to donor sematn (DI) that allows for one parent to be geilly related to the child, and volv a blogil “other” to provi the other half of the geic material.

Where some gay fathers choose to fd out whose sperm actually impregnated the surrogate (or, many s, the egg donor), many others report creatively bypassg this issue by mixg their sperm before sematn and choose not to fd out whose sperm was ultimately rponsible for nceptn followg the birth of their child (Blake et al., 2017; Ryan & Berkowz, 2009) many, the cisn of whose sperm should be ed to impregnate the egg donor or surrogate is a signifint one. However, other rearch has revealed that as gay-prospective fathers evaluate their surrogat-to-be, they refully gate on the importance of racial and ethnic matchg, speculatg how addg another dimensn like racial differenc to their already publicly perplexg fay might nfe their child or encumber teractns wh cur terlopers (Boer, 2009; Ryan & Berkowz, 2009).

Ehrenshaft (2005) argu that this modifitn is further magnified for those g assisted reproductive technologi sce the tend parents have spent months, even years, searchg for a donor or surrogate and drag fancial rourc payg for expensive gay men, this procs is further tensified sce they are not only limed by the reproductive lims of their bodi, but have been told by relig, polil, and cultural stutns that fatherhood was never an optn for them. Although the paradoxil notn of prence and absence n be expected any fay arrangement that reli on assisted reproductn or adoptn, is pecially evint gay father-head fai bee of the nstant societal remr that this third party was a necsy creatg their men who e gtatnal surrogacy are more likely to re about their possible future ntact wh the surrogate more so than the egg donor and are more likely to mata a relatnship wh her the future (Blake et al., 2017; Carone et al., 2018; Greenfeld & Seli, 2011). Moreover, while the basis of mercial surrogacy is a fancial arrangement, the reali are such that this is often a relatnship characterized by appreciatn, mutual rpect, and gratu, wh many gay fathers often fg ep bonds wh their surrogat (Mchell & Green, 2007) limed empiril rearch on gay fathers who have ed surrogacy suggts that they cultivate ways to share the pregnancy experience of their surrogate.

Perhaps bee surrogacy volv a pregnancy that is trickier to hi, downplay, or ignore, rearch has found that pared wh other fai nstcted through assisted reproductive technologi, such as DI, fai formed through surrogacy are more open about the orig of their fay, regardls of parents’ sexual orientatn (Carone et al., 2017) example, one Amerin study, 83% of the gay fathers the sample had started the disclosure procs to their children by the time they were 5.

The rt of the children exhibed some knowledge of their orig, and even though they did not explicly mentn a surrogate or egg donor, they were able to expla that their fathers need help creatg them (Carone et al., 2017) way that parents munite the uniquens of their fay to their children is by celebratg a child’s nceptn day addn to the child’s actual birthday, as this be an important date that gay fathers who created their fai though surrogacy are unique knowg (Mchell & Green, 2007). Future rearch is need on how children born to gay fathers and surrogate mothers negotiate domant two-parent heteronormative fay iology as they unrstand their fay stori and munite the stori to Fay Experience for Children and Their FathersLike all sexual mory parents, gay fathers who have nstcted their fai through surrogacy and their children mt ntend wh the “hegemonic shadow of the heterosexual paradigm” (Boer, 2009, p.