Surrogate refuses to abort triplet despite bio family’s demands
A surrogate mom is creating quite a battle with the biological parents of three babies growing inside her womb.
At 17 weeks pregnant, Brittneyrose Torres of Thousand Oaks, California, is refusing to carry out the parents’ wishes to abort one of the triplets.
According to The New York Post, 26-year-old Torres was originally implanted with two fertilized eggs — one that ended up splitting into twin boys and another that is female. The bio parents were initially thrilled with the news of triplets. At 12 weeks into the pregnancy, however, they demanded an abortion for the female fetus for “increased medical risks for developmental disabilities.”
Torres said she contacted her doctors, who told her there were no abnormalities. She then offered to adopt the unwanted baby instead of going through with an abortion, but the couple refused.
Torres told The Post the bio parents “knew from the beginning that we wouldn’t want to abort unless it was a life-and-death situation.” However, the contract Torres signed included a provision for the bio parents to have the right to order an abortion — and to suspend some payments to the surrogate for not following through.
Technically, a woman in the U.S. has the legal right to make her own reproductive choices. But the lines definitely get blurry when it comes to surrogacy. The baby is growing in the surrogate’s body, yes, but she clearly made an agreement beforehand that directly addressed abortion. It’s tricky business, and the situation is obviously causing heartache for all parties involved. Honestly, I’m not sure what I would do in Torres’ shoes, either.
babycenter
At 17 weeks pregnant, Brittneyrose Torres of Thousand Oaks, California, is refusing to carry out the parents’ wishes to abort one of the triplets.
According to The New York Post, 26-year-old Torres was originally implanted with two fertilized eggs — one that ended up splitting into twin boys and another that is female. The bio parents were initially thrilled with the news of triplets. At 12 weeks into the pregnancy, however, they demanded an abortion for the female fetus for “increased medical risks for developmental disabilities.”
Torres said she contacted her doctors, who told her there were no abnormalities. She then offered to adopt the unwanted baby instead of going through with an abortion, but the couple refused.
Torres told The Post the bio parents “knew from the beginning that we wouldn’t want to abort unless it was a life-and-death situation.” However, the contract Torres signed included a provision for the bio parents to have the right to order an abortion — and to suspend some payments to the surrogate for not following through.
Technically, a woman in the U.S. has the legal right to make her own reproductive choices. But the lines definitely get blurry when it comes to surrogacy. The baby is growing in the surrogate’s body, yes, but she clearly made an agreement beforehand that directly addressed abortion. It’s tricky business, and the situation is obviously causing heartache for all parties involved. Honestly, I’m not sure what I would do in Torres’ shoes, either.
babycenter
No comments:
Dear Great mind,
Your feedback is very important. We need it to serve you better