AGORA

Agora debate ·

U.S. Supreme Court declines to give surrogate custody of baby she birthed

The question

Should the surrogate have parental rights over the baby?

Yes 45%No 55%

49 players picked a side before playing.

Play this story

The best arguments

Written by Agora players and ranked by Agora's AI reasoning score. Shown without names.

  • I think McKenna West should have been given parental rights. The parents wanted to abort the Gabriel because of Hypoplastic left heart syndrome which is treatable with 3 heart surgeries. 70% of babies survive the first stage of surgery and 90% of children who live for a year are likely to survive long term. The biological parents wanted baby Gabriel killed even though he was perfectly treatable. United States law needs to change to regulate and protect Surrogates and surrogacy mothers. It is highly unregulated leading to lots of bad things to happen like this case and the sex offender in Pennsylvania who was able to get a baby even though he was a sex offender which is illegal.

    A player · strong argument

  • Of course. Intent to abort a child shows that one is unfit to be a parent, as they do not see the child as anything more than a commodity that they don’t like. With surrogacy especially, which often can commodify woman - reducing them to a womb to be bought and controlled - babies are further turned into objects in certain parent’s eyes. Over 90% of scientists agree that a fetus is a human life with a unique set of DNA, which means it should be protected and given the right to live. “Parents” who disagree and would rather kill a child out of convenience are therefore unfit to be parents, as they, either through ignorance or indifference, do not see the baby as the person that it is.

    A player · decent argument

  • At the end of the day, they signed a contract stating that if the biological parents asked to terminate a child due to health complications that the surrogate would. Therefore surrogate did not follow through with their instructions and there is no where in the contract that gives the baby up to the surrogate.

    A player · decent argument

  • The difference lies in the agreed contract staring the difference between biological connection vs genetic connection. The surrogate signs away any parental responsibility outside of the act of carrying the baby to term and delivery.

    A player · decent argument

  • The surrogates decision to continue the pregnancy even after the parents requested termination doesn’t eliminate the fact that a) the surrogate breached the agreement by not wanting to terminate the pregnancy and b) the child is still genetically the parents, even if they originally decided to terminate the pregnancy, the surrogate has no claim over the child

    A player · decent argument

  • Should the intended parents be offered protection? Protection against what? Protection to be able to abort a baby that they don’t want? This is no protection at all. At most, they should have the right to abolish their own claim to the baby but should not be able to force an abortion. Lawmakers need to add federal-level legislation here to clarify this situation when states’ laws are in conflict.

    A player · decent argument

  • It’s not explicitly stated like you say. You need to utilize critical thinking and logic. If the genetic parents requested the abortion and it happens what’s the result? The baby ceases to exist. So they’ve come to terms with not being the parents. If someone else wants to step up and care for the child then that should be allowed.

    A player · decent argument

  • The basis under which the genetic parents forfeiture of rights is not legal, but moral and logical. The parents encouraged West to abide by the contract and kill the baby she was carrying. The parents wanted not to have the baby. If the parents had not known of West's actions, they would be in no different place than if West had the abortion. Because the result of having the abortion and secretly not have the abortion are the same, we should consider them in deciding the intent of the parents. By knowingly ending the life of the child, the parents logically forfeited parental rights, because the result of the abortion is that they had no child.

    A player · decent argument

In this game

  1. West agreed to terminate the pregnancy if a serious fetal abnormality was found and the intended parents requested it.
  2. Where did McKenna West move to give birth?
  3. Who said what?
  4. Immersive Command Mode
Play this story

See every story