Discussions if Commercial surrogacy is ethical or not is often controversial. Generally, the term Commercial surrogacy refers to an arrangement between the surrogate mother and intended parents in which there's a mutual benefit. It has turned into an appealing substitute for new couples because of adoption troubles, fertility issues, or high pregnancy risks. However, many still question the morality of surrogacy. A contemporary moral philosopher, Elizabeth Anderson, argues that surrogacy contacts degrade children and women's labor by treating them as commodities.This is the belief argument for surrogacy not being ethical.The following will be a close evaluation of the conflict.In which follows, I will explain the positive outcomes of surrogacy
…show more content…
We are all free to use our bodies as we please - a surrogacy mother isn't any different. Anderson argues “commercial surrogacy also degrades women by treating their bodies as factories and by paying them not to bond with the children they bear”. I will argue from this view that ,surrogacy is way deeper than about compensation it deals with a great level of altruism. Most women pursue surrogacy because they want to help build other families. Furthermore, Anderson almost can't fathom that a woman would put herself into the position of being a surrogate without some sort of force. A woman making her own decisions and using her own body to carry a child for another person,of her own free will, is not ethical. It connects to this ideas libertarianism which indicate that a person is free to do whatever they want with their bodies unless it's harming somebody else. Anderson also argues that “there something money can't buy’.I agree with her idea here because sometimes you can’t profit over a certain good. It challenges utilitarianism.Although I have shown you can't buy certain things ,I will still prove that surrogacy is more than about money. Additionally, surrogacy provides a mutual benefit for both parties..There are always costs associated with having a baby, but that does not mean that the objective is to place a monetary value on a
We are all free to use our bodies as we please - a surrogacy mother isn't any different. Anderson argues “commercial surrogacy also degrades women by treating their bodies as factories and by paying them not to bond with the children they bear”. I will argue from this view that ,surrogacy is way deeper than about compensation it deals with a great level of altruism. Most women pursue surrogacy because they want to help build other families. Furthermore, Anderson almost can't fathom that a woman would put herself into the position of being a surrogate without some sort of force. A woman making her own decisions and using her own body to carry a child for another person,of her own free will, is not ethical. It connects to this ideas libertarianism which indicate that a person is free to do whatever they want with their bodies unless it's harming somebody else. Anderson also argues that “there something money can't buy’.I agree with her idea here because sometimes you can’t profit over a certain good. It challenges utilitarianism.Although I have shown you can't buy certain things ,I will still prove that surrogacy is more than about money. Additionally, surrogacy provides a mutual benefit for both parties..There are always costs associated with having a baby, but that does not mean that the objective is to place a monetary value on a