Adoption vs Surrogacy

Like many people, intended parents have often dreamed for years about a child that has their genetics — someone that shares their eyes, their nose, their face. It’s hard to let go of the dream of a “mini-me” that reflects who you are. Just because a couple struggles to conceive on their own doesn’t mean these dreams go away — or that they move past them to automatically adopt instead.

Parents who can conceive on their own aren’t judged for their desire to have a biological child, so why should intended parents be? Before you ask why people didn’t choose adoption, consider this situation: Wouldn’t you try to have a genetic child yourself if assisted reproductive technology (ART) allowed for it?

Often, intended parents who pursue surrogacy have already gone through rounds of unsuccessful IVF procedures. An intended mother may know she cannot carry a child but, if the couple has remaining embryos, the decision of what to do with them is complex. Storing embryos forever can be costly, but it can be difficult to dispose of them or donate them to another couple.

If intended parents have remaining embryos, surrogacy may be the next logical step for them. This ART method will give them the chance to use the embryos they have spent money creating and give them the last chance to have the biological child they have dreamed about.

Girls, thanks for your answers, but adoption is a noble cause. Why do not many childless couples resort to this method of filling the family? I understand that they want to have a genetically native child. But the difference between the cost of these processes is very big, right? Few childless couples have the financial ability to use the services of a surrogate mother. So why don't they adopt a child and give him a family? Sometimes I feel so sorry for the children who spend their childhood in the orphanage. But I understand that such children should be taken to a family solely out of noble motives, and not out of despair.

Both surrogacy and adoption are expensive processes, although surrogacy is the more expensive of the two. Both in surrogacy and in adoption, intended parents pay for the prospective birth mother or surrogate’s pregnancy-related expenses. But in surrogacy, intended parents must also provide additional base compensation for the surrogate. Both adoption and surrogacy require intended parents to think hard about how they can finance their parenthood processes. While there are certain tax credits available for adoption, surrogacy does not offer as much — only potential tax deductions for IVF processes.

The laws around adoption and surrogacy are different in every country. For instance, there are laws that determine whether you can compensate your surrogate. There are also laws that determine who can get a court order before the baby is born. The costs will vary from country to country and from doctor to doctor. It’s important to research your options before committing to either process.

Thank you for sharing your opinions. Of course, many childless couples want to have a genetically native child. I agree with you that we should not blame people for their choice. I also believe that surrogacy has many advantages over adoption, even despite the high cost. Girls, let's discuss the legal side of this issue. Indeed, in many cases, childless couples have to travel abroad to find a surrogacy clinic. We spoke with you earlier that in many countries surrogacy is prohibited. So what is easier: to adopt a child or draw up documents for a child born due to a surrogate mother?

While there is always a chance of disruption in adoption, there is never any uncertainty about who will parent the baby in a surrogacy agreement. The surrogate knows from the beginning that she is carrying a baby for the intended parents. The pregnancy is planned ahead of time and legally binding contracts are signed, so there tend to be fewer surprises in the surrogacy process.

Adoptive families often have less control throughout the process and may face more uncertainty about the birth mother’s commitment to adoption, the birth father’s support of the adoption, the prenatal care the baby is receiving, and more.

Also, I did not answer your question about the difference in cost. I wanted to say that surrogacy and adoption both involve many services, professionals and fees, including program and agency fees, legal costs and medical expenses. In addition to these costs, most surrogates are compensated by intended parents for their time, energy and sacrifices they make throughout the pregnancy. While birth mothers can receive reasonable living expenses for costs like rent and groceries, it is illegal for them to financially benefit from adoption with additional compensation. The additional fees for surrogate compensation and the embryo transfer process can make surrogacy significantly more expensive than adoption.

In addition, there may be fewer financing options available in surrogacy. For example, there is no federal tax credit for surrogacy like there is for adoption. However, if the intended parents act as the egg and/or sperm donor and incur significant medical expenses, they may be able to deduct IVF expenses, lab fees, doctor appointments and medications from their taxes.

By the way, Amanda, we recently talked with you about surrogacy. Do you remember that I told you that this service in Ukraine is inexpensive. In addition, in Ukraine this issue is organized by law. A surrogate mother does not have any rights to the child she is bearing. Therefore, from a legal point of view, this country is very convenient for potential parents. Many childless couples also prefer to adopt children from Ukraine. However, this process is very long and difficult. And surrogacy in this country is not accompanied by difficulties.

Girls, the medical factor is very important in this matter. Surrogacy involves a planned pregnancy achieved through complex medical procedures that are not involved in adoption. In surrogacy, the intended mother or egg donor will need to take fertility medications and undergo an egg retrieval procedure. The eggs are then fertilized in the laboratory to create an embryo, which is transferred to the surrogate through another medical procedure. The surrogate will also be required to take various fertility treatments before and during the pregnancy.

Like intended parents, surrogates must undergo a thorough medical screening before they can be matched to prospective intended parents. Throughout this process, drug and alcohol use is ruled out, and intended parents can be assured that the baby will not be exposed to any harmful substances in utero. The legal contracts signed by the prospective surrogate and intended parents often also include provisions to ensure the surrogate is receiving proper prenatal care.

In adoption, birth mother screening is often less thorough and invasive. Pregnant women considering adoption are typically asked to self-disclose any drug or alcohol use, along with their social and medical history, and they may or may not choose to receive prenatal care. And if you adopt a small child, you cannot be sure that in the future he will not have any genetic diseases. Of course, now there are various screenings, but genetics still has a great impact on the health and nature of the child.

I agree with you, today a lot of families refuse their children. Indeed, it is impossible to find out if the mother of the child did not take alcohol and drugs during pregnancy. Of course, in this regard surrogacy certainly wins. After all, a surrogate mother signs a contract according to which she should not take prohibited substances. In addition, her condition is constantly monitored by clinic staff. In addition, genetic material is taken either from the child's parents or from healthy donors. It is really very important for the health of the unborn child.