Archive for the ‘News’ Category

Surrogacy 101: Matching

Posted on: April 9th, 2013 by Simple Surrogacy No Comments

Surrogacy 101: Matching

After you have completed your profile, you’ll be assigned an Intended parent Number. That will be your identification to the Surrogates who will look at your profile anonymously.

We do not do forced matching, which means you are just given one appropriate surrogate. Instead, we believe that the relationship between Intended Parents and Surrogate is crucial to the success of the process, and so we want to match you with your most compatible surrogate.

The Surrogates in our program see the profiles first. They review the Intended Parents that are seeking to match, and from those profiles, they indicate whom they would be interested in working with. Once a surrogate has selected your profile, her profile is then sent to you. because of the nature of the system, you may have one surrogate or several at a time who indicate they are interested in matching with you. If you also like the surrogate’s profile, then we will set up a conference call between you so that you can get to know each other better. A Simple Surrogacy representative will be on that call to supervise the call and answer additional questions. If you like each other, then we’ll move forward. If not, the process begins again.

As you will see, the length of the process depends on many factors; how quickly you match depends on how choosy your are, and how your profile is seen by the available surrogates. Your flexibility and openness to the process will give you the most options.

Reposting- Why I embrace Gay marriage

Posted on: March 27th, 2013 by Simple Surrogacy No Comments

I am re-posting this excellent blog on why Gay Marriage is a wonderful thing to be supported!

Why I Embrace “Gay Marriage”

Simply put, I fully believe in the idea that “all men* are created equal” and are entitled to equal protection under the law.

*(“men” being a generic word for humans, as in “mankind” — I believe the statement equally applies to women.)

Of course, others argue against it. Let’s look at the arguments.

“Perversion!” some cry. “They’ll rape our children!” Yet the overwhelming majority of pedophiles are heterosexual, so I consider this ill-informed fear-mongering; if we wanted our children to be left alone, we should prefer they had gay teachers. As for the “perversion” of “deciding” on an “alternative lifestyle,” when did you decide to be straight? When did you choose to only be attracted to the opposite sex? I never made such a choice, and I truly don’t believe that anyone makes that “choice” either. Why would anyone choose to put him- or herself up against the majority of society like that? Simply, I don’t believe anyone really makes such a “choice” — I believe we were born the way we were born, straight or gay, and sometimes a man in a woman’s body (or vice versa). Whether you believe we are created by God or simply by nature, the only true “perversion” is trying to change that creation.

“Tradition!” many say. When I was a child, it was “tradition” to discriminate against those called “negroes” at that time. During my lifetime, dozens of states had laws prohibiting blacks and whites from marrying, too. It wasn’t until 1967 that the Supreme Court struck down “anti-miscegenation” laws. That instantly destroyed all marriages, right? Well, no, I didn’t see that happen either. If your marriage is somehow less valuable because someone else fell in love and got married (whether they are black, white, straight, or gay), that says something terrible about your marriage, and nothing about theirs. It’s not anyone’s business what you do in your marriage that doesn’t infringe on your spouse’s rights, and other marriages are not any of your business, either.

“If we allow this, then we’ll have to allow people to marry animals and children!” is fairly common too, and is another ridiculous overreaction — and was a common argument against interracial marriages. Marriage is a legal contract between consenting adults. Neither animals nor children meet that simple definition.

“Procreation!” others argue. Yet can heterosexual white people get married if they’re infertile? Of course they can. Can gay people bring up terrific, well-adjusted adopted children? Of course they can. (Will they “teach” the chilrden to be gay? No more than their heterosexual parents “taught them” to be gay!) We don’t prohibit the elderly (beyond childbearing age) from marrying. We don’t prohibit the disabled who are unable to procreate from marrying. We don’t even prohibit prison inmates sentenced to life (or death!) from marrying. Procreation is a garbage argument.

The Biblical Argument

The 'Pride' version of the GOOHF card. Click for details or ordering.And the last vestige of the haters is, “It’s forbidden in the Bible!” Your Freedom of Religion allows you to believe this if you wish, but everyone else’s Freedom of Religion allows them not to, and it’s not up to you to force your religion of hate and inequality on others. But let’s stay with that argument for a moment. If you’re in the “it says it in the Bible” camp, that means you:

  • Have never worn clothes made of more than one fabric.
  • Have never cut your hair nor shaved.
  • Have personally investigated and killed every person you’ve seen who has done something against the Lord, as commanded by Deuteronomy 17:2-7.
  • Have never eaten shellfish, pork, or rabbits.
  • Have never lied or gossiped.
  • Have never read your horoscope.
  • Have never violated any other rule set forth in the Bible.

…and thus can certify you are worthy of “casting the first stone” — right? Or are you just another hypocrite according to your own beliefs? (You do know what Jesus had to say about hypocrites, yes?)

And you’re willing to swear you are worthy of this, “So Help You God” with your hand on that Bible you’re using as a weapon?

I doubt anyone qualifies.

I wouldn’t be at all surprised if the Bible was used as an argument against mixed racial marriage too.

The Kicker: Gay Marriage is a Conservative Value

If I had any doubts about my stance, they were erased by Ted Olson. Olson’s not some liberal mouthpiece: he’s the arch-conservative lawyer who argued the Bush side in Bush v. Gore (and won), for which he was rewarded by George W. Bush with the position of Solicitor General. Olson is also a founding member of the Federalist Society, and a former member of the editorial board of The American Spectator magazine (a conservative monthly).

Here’s just some of what Olson had to say in an interview with Chris Wallace — on Fox News:

Is a court allowing gay marriage “judicial activism”?

No. As a matter of fact, since 1888 the United States Supreme Court has 14 times decided and articulated that the right to marriage is a fundamental right. We’re not talking about a new right here.We’re talking about whether a fundamental right, something that the Supreme Court has characterized as the most fundamental relationship we have in this country, can be deprived of certain individuals because of the color of their skin or because of their sexual orientation.

We do not permit discrimination, inequality. That’s why we have a 14th Amendment that guarantees equal rights to all citizens. It’s not judicial activism when judges do what the Constitution requires them to do, and they follow the precedent of previous decisions of the Supreme Court.

When you say “same-sex marriage,” you’re saying a particular type of marriage. The Supreme Court has looked at marriage and has said that the right to marry is a fundamental right for all citizens.

This is what judges are expected to do. It is not judicial activism. It is judicial responsibility in its classic sense.

But people have voted against it!

Well, would you like your right to free speech — would you like Fox’s right to free press put up to a vote and say, “Well, if five states have approved it, let’s wait till the other 45 states do?” These are fundamental constitutional rights.The Bill of Rights guarantees Fox News and you… the right to speak. It’s in the Constitution. And the Supreme Court has repeatedly held that the denial of our citizens of the equal rights to equal access to justice under the law is a violation of our fundamental rights.

All we have to do is look into the eyes of these individuals and decide why are we denying them the right to happiness that we afford to all of our other citizens.

Out of context? Judge for yourself! Here is that interview in its entirety:

Due to Youtube’s then-10-minute-limit on videos, the last 3-1/2 minutes are in a separate video:

The Bottom Line

The Constitution is a brilliant document: it guarantees freedom and equal protection for all. Not “all except…” but all. In addition to being an institution of the church, marriage is, in fact, an institution of government, and it conveys extra rights and privileges to those who choose to do it. To disallow “certain people” those rights and privileges is clearly legal discrimination, and thus unconstitutional.

Today, the Supreme Court started to hear arguments on this. I can’t imaging that the top court in the Land of the Free could rule that such discrimination is warranted.

Even Karl Rove, the arch-conservative Republican operative, agrees he could “imagine the [2016] presidential Republican candidate saying flat out ‘I am for gay marriage’.” Republicans could make the huge mistake of sticking to the 21st Century anti-miscegenation law. OR they can agree that ensuring equal protection under the law — the Constitutional ideal — is truly a Conservative Value.

Join me in supporting equality in marriage. It’s the American Way.

http://www.thisistrue.com/blog-why_i_embrace_gay_marriage.html

Support Gay Right to Marriage

Posted on: March 25th, 2013 by Simple Surrogacy No Comments

Today the Supreme Court takes up the issue of Gay Marriage. As many of our personal friends and Clients have demonstrated, love and the right to marry who you love is not something only for straight people, it’s a right that we all need to support for everyone. We hope the justices will support strong Gay marriage rights for everyone as they hear arguments this week. They have the power to make history in favor of fairness and love for everyone.

By Pete Williams, Justice Correspondent, NBC News

The U.S. Supreme Court this week takes its first serious look ever at the issue of same-sex marriage, considering two cases that raise a fundamental issue: does the Constitution’s guarantee of equal protection allow legal distinctions between same-sex couples and those of the opposite sex?

The greatest potential for a ruling with nationwide implications comes in a case from California, to be argued Tuesday, brought by proponents of Proposition 8. The following day, the court will hear a separate case challenging the Defense of Marriage Act, which prevents the federal government from recognizing same-sex marriages in states where they are legal.

Approved by 52 percent of California voters in 2008, Prop 8 amended the state constitution to ban same-sex marriages. It was placed on the ballot after 18,000 couples had been legally wed there.

A federal judge in San Francisco declared the ban unconstitutional, and the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit upheld the ruling. Once a state grants a fundamental right like marriage, the appeals court said, it cannot later take it away, even by voter initiative.

Urging the Supreme Court to reverse those rulings, Prop 8’s defenders argue that the state has a legitimate reason for treating same-sex couples differently: only couples consisting of a man and a woman can produce children.

“This indisputable difference between same-sex and opposite-sex relationships demonstrates that Proposition 8 is constitutional, for the Constitution requires only that a state treat similarly situated persons similarly,” they argue in their legal brief filed with the court.

Paul Katami and Jeff Zarrillo, one of two gay couples fighting to strike down California’s ban on gay marriage, will have their case heard Tuesday at the Supreme Court.

“California has simply reserved a special form of recognition and support to those relationships that have long been thought to uniquely further vital societal interests,” they say.

What’s more, Prop 8’s supporters argue, marriage is such an important institution that the courts should proceed with caution before changing the rules. “It is plainly reasonable for the people of California to be concerned about the potential consequences of such a profound redefinition of a bedrock social institution.”

The case began three years ago when a gay couple, Jeff Zarillo and Paul Katami in Los Angeles, along with a lesbian couple from the Bay area, Kris Perry and Sandy Stier, filed a lawsuit to challenge Prop 8. Their cause took on added notoriety when two of the nation’s most prominent lawyers, conservative Ted Olson and liberal David Boies, agreed to take the case.

Olsen and Boies have been on opposite sides more often than not, most notably in the battle over counting disputed ballots from Florida in the presidential election of 2000.

They agree with the Prop 8 proponents on one issue. “Marriage is a unique, venerable, and essential institution.”

The two couples, they say, “simply want to be part of it.”

They argue that Prop 8 cannot meet the legal test required of a law that discriminates — having a legitimate government purpose.  Its proponents, they argue, “have never identified a single harm that they, or anyone else, would suffer as a result of allowing gay men and lesbians to marry.”

Banning same-sex marriage “does not increase the likelihood that opposite-sex couples capable of procreating will decide to get married, nor would permitting gay men and lesbians to marry decrease that likelihood,” they say.

President Obama, after first saying that marriage was an issue for the states to decide on their own, changed course last year.  As a result, his administration’s Justice Department has weighed in supporting the two couples.

“When it comes to marriage, the basic principle that America is founded on — the idea that we’re all created equal — applies to everybody regardless of sexual orientation,” Obama said at a White House news conference earlier this month.

If the Supreme Court invalidates Prop 8 based on the reasoning of the federal appeals court, the ruling would affect only California, permitting marriage for same-sex couples to resume there. No other state has granted and then withdrawn the marriage right for gay couples. But Olson and Boies urge the justices to go further and rule that because such an essential right is at stake, no state can refuse to permit same-sex couples to get married.

Thea Spyer describes her 44-year relationship with same-sex spouse Edie Windsor and how Windsor’s death inspired her to fight for gay marriage rights in a case that will be heard in the Supreme Court on Wednesday.

The Supreme Court could reverse the lower courts and uphold Prop 8 as a legitimate exercise of the people’s right to amend their state constitution, an outcome urged by the ballot measure’s backers.

The court also gave itself a way out of ruling on the merits of the California case.  It directed lawyers for both sides to address an unusual aspect of the controversy.

After voters approved Prop 8, California officials declined to defend it, and the legal battle was picked up by the initiative’s backers.  The Supreme Court must decide whether they had the legal authority to stand in for the state and pursue the battle.

The case has attracted an unusually large number of friend-of-the-court briefs. Among those filing in support of Prop 8 are the US Conference of Catholic Bishops and 20 of the 38 states that forbid same-sex marriage either by statute or constitutional amendment.

On the other side, 130 prominent conservatives urge the court to strike Prop 8 down, including former Republican Party Chairman Kenneth Mehlman, actor Clint Eastwood, and former Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge. Among major corporations taking the same position are Alcoa, Apple, Nike, Verizon, and Xerox.

The court will decide the case sometime before its term ends in late June.

Surrogacy 101: Intended Parent Profile

Posted on: March 16th, 2013 by Simple Surrogacy No Comments

This article continues our series on Surrogacy Basics, Surrogacy 101. This focuses on the Intended Parent profile and the role it plays in matching our Intended Parents.

 

Surrogacy 101: Intended Parent Profile

After you have cleared the background check and interview, the next step is the completion of your Intended Parent Profile. We have recently introduced a new Intended Parent Profile that is available in a secure online web site.

You simply log onto the link that we provide to you and complete your profile. This profile is the single most important part of your Surrogacy matching, as it determines the first impression that surrogates have of you. Your profile will be sent anonymously at first, so they will not know your identity or address.

The Surrogates will read your preferences, read about you and your partner (if applicable) and read your letter to them. They will take this into consideration when they decide if they would be interested in working with you. To give the best possible impression, you should be honest, eloquent and sincere. We’ll help you with your responses if you’d like, as we have seen hundreds of profiles and we’re able to best judge how surrogates will respond to profiles.

You’ll upload images as well, so that the Surrogates can get to know you a bit better.

In your profile, you will also indicate your preferences for your surrogate. Your potential surrogates will not see that information, it’s just for Agency purposes so that we may match you most closely with the best surrogate. You will indicate your preferences, if any, on education, working vs. stay at home, ethnicity, etc. You should remember that the more preferences you have, the longer it may take to make your match. If you can be flexible, then more surrogates will be available to you.

All of this information, taken together, helps us provide a complete picture of you, your partner (if applicable) and what you are looking for in your ideal surrogate. Our expert program Director uses this information, as well as her years of experience, to put together surrogate and Intended Parent matches that result in excellent relationships and wonderful journeys to parenthood.

Free Spring Consultations!

Posted on: February 25th, 2013 by Simple Surrogacy No Comments

Are you interested in learning more about our Surrogacy and/or Egg Donation programs at Simple Surrogacy? If you have been thinking about having a consultation, now is the time to schedule! We are offering no-charge consultations by appointment only on March 28, 29 or 30  between 9 and 4 in our Dallas, TX office.

Please call our Executive Program Director, Stephanie Scott to schedule at 214-673-9321

We look forward to meeting with you!

More troubling news for Indian Surrogacy

Posted on: January 7th, 2013 by Simple Surrogacy No Comments

As we earlier posted, surrogacy in India has many problems and issues. Now, new requirements from Mumbai eliminate for many the possibility of an Indian Surrogacy. This is very distressing for the many Gay Couples, Unmarried couples and single parents who had intended to go to India for Surrogacy and who can no longer utilize India for their surrogacy.

We at Simple Surrogacy sympathize with those who has already begun or intended to begin a surrogacy journey in India. As such, we would like to offer a discount for International parents of the waiving of our International fee ($2,000) or for domestic Intended Parents, a $1,500 discount off our regular surrogacy fees.

Below is are the unfortunate details, from Andrew Vorzimer’s blog at www.eggdonor.com/blog

New Guidelines: India Not A Viable Option For Gay Couples, Unmarried Couples Or Single Individuals

We have chronicled on this blog the perilous nature of proceeding with a surrogate arrangement in India. From international couples being trapped in India because their child is stateless and thus incapable of obtaining a passport, to twins being born who were not genetically related to one another, to a surrogate vanishing with the Intended Parents’ child, the problems are significant and potentially insurmountable.

And a bad situation has only gotten worse. We have now just received from the Deputy Commissioner of Police in Mumbai, the following guidelines issued by the India’s Ministry of Home Affairs. Here are the guidelines that apply to foreign nationals seeking to proceed with an Indian surrogate:

1. Tourist visa is not the appropriate visa category and such foreigners will be liable for action for violation of visa conditions. The appropriate visa category for commissioning surrogacy is a medical visa.

2. The foreign man and woman intending to commission surrogacy should be duly married and the marriage should have sustained for at least two years Please also note that current Indian laws do not recognise gay marriages.

3. The couple commissioning surrogacy should be in the possession of a letter from the Embassy of the foreign country in India or the foreign ministry of the country stating clearly that:
a. The country recognises surrogacy;
b. The child/children to be born to the commissioning couple through the Indian surrogate will be permitted entry into their country as a biological child/children of the commissioning surrogacy.

4. The couple commission surrogacy is required to furnish an undertaking that they would take care of the child/children born through surrogacy.

5. The couple should produce a duly notarised agreement between the applicant couple and the prospective Indian surrogate mother.

6. The treatment concerning surrogacy should be done only at one of the registered ART clinics recognised by ICMR.

7. The foreign couple before leaving India for their return journey would require exit permission and should be carrying a certificate form the ART clinic concerned regarding the fact that the child/children have been duly taken custody of by the foreigner and the liabilities toward the Indian surrogate mother are fully discharged as per the agreement. A copy of the birth certificate(s) of the surrogate child/children will be returned by the FRRO/FRO along with photocopies of the passport and visa of the foreign parents.

You are therefore hereby ordered to ascertain all the above mentioned details before commissioning the surrogacy cases of foreigners and not to accept any case for surrogacy if the conditions of no. 1 to7 of this letter are not fulfilled by the foreigner. Contravention of this order may hold you liable for legal action under the Foreigners Act 1946. Also you are hereby informed that because of noncompliance of this order on your part if in future any complication arises in respect or surrogate baby’s nationality and their parenthood, you will be held responsible for it.

Further you are directed to provide list of foreigners with the details of their nationality, visa, passport, etc. who have already registered with you for commissioning surrogacy to this office.

Notably, same-sex couples, single individuals, unmarried couples and couples who have been married for less than 2 years fall outside these guidelines. Moreover, if the international couple’s country of origin does not recognize surrogacy, then the couple would also be in violation of the Indian guidelines. And the penalty for proceeding with a surrogate arrangement in contravention of these guidelines? Imprisonment. Under Section 14 of the Foreigners Act, 1946, “If any person contravenes the provisions of this Act or of any order made thereunder, or any direction given in pursuance of this Act or such order, he shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to five years and shall also be liable to fine….”

Hat tip to my colleague, Stephen Page, for sharing these guidelines with me.

Are surrogacies in India exploitative of Carrier’s rights?

Posted on: December 29th, 2012 by Simple Surrogacy No Comments

Many more UK couples are seeking surrogacies in India due to cost reasons, but these surrogacies raise questions about the rights of the Gestational Carrier. It is very hard to determine how informed the carrier is, as contracts are generally not used, and terms can often be fuzzy. As the article below demonstrates, it is very near the borderline of “paying for” a baby, especially when the Gestational Carrier may or may not receive the money herself, and may not be clear that she is not going to keep the baby or indeed, ever see it again. Certainly, the fact that the Carrier referenced in thr article needed “reminding” that the babies were not hers is very troubling. Although cost is certainly a factor in all artificial reproduction, we’ve found that there are ways to pay a reasonable amount while still avoiding any issues of exploitation and “baby selling” that may be involved in an Indian surrogacy.

Exclusive: Rise in number of couples seeking ‘wombs for hire’ abroad

Increase in British couples turning to poor foreign surrogate mothers to have their babies

Wealthy British couples who cannot have children are increasingly seeking “wombs for hire” from women overseas, according to figures obtained by The Independent.

The number of couples formally registering children born to foreign surrogates has nearly trebled in five years, raising concerns that poor women in developing countries are being exploited by rich Westerners.

“Parental orders” granted following surrogacy – to transfer the child from the surrogate mother to the commissioning parents – have risen from 47 in 2007 to 133 in 2011.

While the figures are still relatively small, experts say they understate the true scale of the trade which is driven by agencies operating in countries such as India, drawn by a lack of red tape and the absence of regulation.

There are parallels with the trade in inter-country adoption 20 years ago, when hundreds of children from impoverished families in eastern Europe and the developing world were “sold” to wealthy foreigners, with few checks on their suitability, they claim.

Commercial surrogacy is permitted in the US and in many other countries including India, where it was legalised in 2002.

But it is banned in Britain and only expenses may be paid – making it difficult for UK couples where neither partner is able to bear children to find women prepared to volunteer for the role.

In 2010 the law was changed to allow gay and lesbian couples and unmarried heterosexual couples to use surrogates for the first time, boosting demand further.

Events such as the Alternative Families Show, which acts as a showcase for surrogacy agencies overseas, regularly draw large crowds. The impact can be seen in the increasing numbers of wealthy British couples who are going abroad where there are fewer restrictions and a surrogate womb can be rented from £10,000 to £20,000. Some do so after trying and failing to have a baby by in-vitro fertilisation, directed by doctors who have been treating them.

“We have clinicians in this country who have links with overseas clinics. That was stopped with international adoption years ago. I don’t think the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority has been strong enough on this,” said Marilyn Crawshaw, senior lecturer in the University of York’s department of social policy, who published the figures on parental orders in the Journal of Social Welfare and Family Law.

“There is concern about child trafficking. The World Health Organisation held a meeting on this. One report described a surrogacy ring in Thailand in 2011 in which 13 Vietnamese women, seven of them pregnant, had been trafficked for the purpose of acting as surrogates. Other reports have highlighted concerns about the exploitation of Indian surrogates.”

Ms Crawshaw said evidence suggested that the number of children born in India to commissioning parents from the UK was “well in excess” of the cases known to official sources, making monitoring very difficult.

“US social workers have warned that the decline in inter-country adoption may be leading to its replacement by global surrogacy as the preferred route for those wanting to build their family with a ‘healthy’ infant but with no less concerns among professionals as to associated ethical dilemmas and human rights concerns,” she said.

Natalie Gamble, a lawyer specialising in surrogacy cases, added: “We have got this phenomenon where people can go overseas and do deals with commercial agencies and then come back and ask for a parental order.

“The law of our land says you cannot buy and sell babies. But the judges end up granting the parental order, with just a rap on the knuckles for the parents, on the grounds that the welfare of the child is paramount.

“When people went overseas to adopt, safeguards were put in place to stop the buying and selling of children. Are we going to have the same problems again with overseas surrogacy?”

Case study: ‘It was awkward when the mother had to hand over our twins’

We both found it very hard to keep it together. It was a very emotional time. We could never have imagined it a couple of years ago.”

Stephen Hill and his partner Johnathon Busher first held their twin girls in their arms less than 12 hours after their birth in a Delhi hospital last April.

The gay couple, from the West Midlands, had been together for 18 years when they decided they wanted a family.

In 2011, they travelled to India and agreed a contract with a clinic in Delhi where Mr Hill’s sperm was used to fertilise an egg from a donor they had selected, and the resulting embryo was implanted in a surrogate mother.

When the twins were born there was an “awkward moment” before the surrogate mother agreed to hand them over, as her husband had been telling medical staff the infants were his own.

“She was reminded that it was a deal and she was fine. She was a little bit too attached and she needed to be reminded,” Mr Busher said. “We produced the contract and we were able to take them out of the hospital. We were so happy our feet didn’t touch the ground.”

http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-families/health-news/exclusive-rise-in-number-of-couples-seeking-wombs-for-hire-abroad-8432820.html

What to reject when you’re expecting- by Consumer Reports

Posted on: December 19th, 2012 by Simple Surrogacy No Comments

What to reject when you’re expecting

10 procedures to think twice about during your pregnancy

Published: May 2012

Despite a health-care system that outspends those in the rest of the world, infants and mothers fare worse in the U.S. than in many other industrialized nations. The infant mortality rate in Canada is 25 percent lower than it is in the U.S.; the Japanese rate, more than 60 percent lower. According to the World Health Organization, America ranks behind 41 other countries in preventing mothers from dying during childbirth.

With technological advances in medicine, you would expect those numbers to steadily improve. But the rate of maternal deaths has risen over the last decade, and the number of premature and low-birth-weight babies is higher now than it was in the 1980s and 1990s.

Why are we doing so badly? Partly because mothers tend to be less healthy than in the past, “which contributes to a higher-risk pregnancy,” says Diane Ashton, M.D., deputy medical director of the March of Dimes.

But another key reason appears to be a health-care system that has developed into a highly profitable labor-and-delivery machine, operating according to its own timetable rather than the less predictable schedule of mothers and babies. Childbirth is the leading reason for hospital admission, and the system is set up to make the most of the opportunity. Keeping things chugging along are technological interventions that can be lifesaving in some situations but also interfere with healthy, natural processes and increase risk when used inappropriately.

Topping the list are unnecessary cesarean sections. The rate has risen steadily since the mid-1990s to the point that nearly one of every three American babies now comes into the world through this surgical delivery. That’s double or even triple what the World Health Organization considers optimal.

Some people say that the increase in C-sections and other interventions stems mostly from women, who may be requesting more of the procedures. That could be a contributing cause but it’s not the major one, says Carol Sakala, Ph.D., director of programs at Childbirth Connection, a nonprofit organization that promotes evidence-based maternity care.

“We see rates going up across all birthing groups, including all ages, races, and classes,” Sakala says. “What we are seeing is a change in practice standards, a lowering of the bar for what’s an acceptable indication for medical interventions.”

10 overused procedures

Of course, the idea is not to reject all interventions. The course of childbirth is not something that anyone can completely control. In some situations, inducing labor or doing a C-section is the safest option. And complications are the exception, not the norm. But when they’re not medically necessary, the interventions listed below are associated with poorer outcomes for moms and babies.

1. A C-section with a low-risk first birth

While C-sections are generally quite safe, “the safest method for both mom and baby is an uncomplicated vaginal birth,” says Catherine Spong, M.D., chief of the pregnancy and perinatology branch at the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development.

The U.S. health-care system has developed into a profitable labor-and- delivery machine that operates on its own timetable—not the schedule of mothers and babies.

The best way to reduce the number of C-sections overall is to decrease the number of them among low-risk women delivering their first child. That’s because having an initial C-section “sets the stage for a woman’s entire reproductive life,” says Elliott Main, M.D., chairman of the department of obstetrics and gynecology at the California Pacific Medical Center and director of the California Maternal Quality Care Collaborative. “In this country, if your first birth is a C-section, there’s a 95 percent chance all subsequent births will be as well,” he says.

A C-section is major surgery. So it’s no surprise that as rates for the procedure go down, so do the numbers for several complications, especially infection or pain at the site of the incision. Rare but potentially life-threatening complications include severe bleeding, blood clots, and bowel obstruction. A C-section can also complicate future pregnancies, increasing the risk of problems with the placenta, ectopic pregnancies (those that occur outside the uterus), or a rupture of the uterine scar. And the risks increase with each additional cesarean birth.

Babies born by C-section can be accidentally injured or cut during the procedure and are more likely to have breathing problems. They are also less likely to breast-feed, perhaps because of the challenges of starting in a post-surgical setting.

In some situations, such as when the mother is bleeding heavily or the baby’s oxygen supply is compromised, surgical delivery is absolutely necessary. But women can maximize their chances of avoiding an unnecessary cesarean by finding a caregiver and birthing environment that supports vaginal birth.

When choosing a practitioner and hospital or birthing center, ask about C-section rates, particularly rates for low-risk women having their first child. The target rate for that population should be around 15 percent, according to the American Congress of Obstetrics and Gynecology (ACOG). Although it can be difficult to find a hospital with a C-section rate that low, you might be able find one that meets the more modest goal of about 24 percent, which was set by the government’s Healthy People 2020 initiative.

About a third of the babies born in the U.S. are now delivered by C-section.

2. An automatic second C-section

Just because your first baby was delivered by C-section doesn’t mean your second has to be, too. In fact, most women who have had a C-section with a “low-transverse incision” on the uterus are good candidates for a vaginal birth after cesarean (VBAC), according to ACOG. (Note that a “bikini scar” on the skin does not indicate the type of uterine scar.) About three quarters of such women who attempt a VBAC are able to deliver vaginally.

Yet the percentage of VBACs has declined sharply since the mid-1990s, particularly after ACOG said in 1999 that they should be considered only if hospitals had staff “immediately available” to do emergency C-sections if necessary. And some obstetricians don’t do VBACs because they lack hospital support or training or because their malpractice insurance won’t provide coverage. So women seeking a VBAC delivery might have trouble finding a supportive practitioner and hospital.

“It’s tragic, really,” Main says. “In many parts of the country, the option has all but disappeared.”

In response, ACOG recently relaxed its guidelines. For example, it makes clear that while it’s preferable for staff to be at the ready, hospitals can make do with a clear plan for dealing with uterine ruptures and assembling an emergency team quickly. Experts we spoke with say it’s too early to tell if the move will lead to a change in clinical practice.

Although some women turn to home births as an alternative, our experts say that isn’t a good idea in this situation. “The risk of uterine rupture is low,” Main says, “but if it happens, it can be catastrophic.”

Instead, if you had a C-section, find out whether your obstetrician and hospital are willing to try a VBAC. Let them know that you understand that you your baby will be monitored continuously during labor, and ask what the hospital would do if an emergency C-section became necessary.

Vaginal births after a C-section have declined sharply since the late 1990s.

3. An elective early delivery

A full-term pregnancy goes to at least 39 weeks, but over the last two decades many doctors have come to think they can deliver babies sooner than Mother Nature intended. Between 1990 and 2007, births at 37 and 38 weeks increased 45 percent, according to the March of Dimes. At the same time, full-term births dropped by 26 percent.

Because nearly all late preterm babies survive and eventually thrive, many doctors see no harm in moving up a delivery date to fit a schedule. “Although we knew 39 weeks or later was the optimal time for delivery, until recently there wasn’t a good evidence showing that a lot of maturation took place after 37 weeks,” says Ashton of the March of Dimes, who terms research from the last five years “eye opening.”

Late preterm babies “may look like full term babies,” she says, “but they are different in important ways.”

It turns out that carrying an infant to term has health benefits for both moms and babies. Research shows that babies born at 39 weeks or later have lower rates of breathing problems and are less likely to need neonatal intensive care. Full-term babies may also be less likely to be affected by cerebral palsy or jaundice, have fewer feeding problems, and have a higher rate of survival in their first year. Some research even suggests that full-term infants benefit from cognitive and learning advantages that continue through adolescence.

Perhaps because late preterm infants have more problems, mothers are more likely to suffer from postpartum depression. In addition, the procedures required to intentionally deliver a baby early—either an induced labor or a C-section—also carry a higher risk of complications than a full-term vaginal delivery. “There is just much more chance of things going wrong if you interrupt the normal course of pregnancy,” Spong says.

Of course, some babies arrive sooner than expected and complications during pregnancy, such as skyrocketing blood pressure in the mother, can make early delivery the safest option. But hastening the conclusion of an otherwise healthy pregnancy—even by a couple of days—is never a good idea.

The rate of early deliveries varies widely among hospitals, as demonstrated in the table below of all six hospitals in Utah that report that data to Leapfrog Group. It shows the percentage of early deliveries in each hospital that were done without medical reason. See the rates of planned early deliveries for the hosptials in your state on Leapfrog’s website.

The rate of scheduled early deliveries varies widely in six Utah hospitals.

4. Inducing labor without a medical reason

The percentage of births resulting from artificially induced labor more than doubled from 1990 to 2008. “In many ways the system has become centered on convenience rather than evidence-based care,” says Sakala of the Childbirth Connection. She points out that it’s no coincidence that more babies are born on Tuesdays than any other day of the week. “The births are scheduled so that parents and providers can all be home by the weekend.”

It’s no coincidence that more babies are born on Tuesdays. The births are scheduled so the parents and providers can all be home by the weekend.

But whether artificially induced or spontaneous, labor is labor, right? “Absolutely not,” says Debra Bingham Dr.PH., R.N., vice president of the Association of Women’s Health, Obstetric and Neonatal Nurses. She points out that women who go into labor naturally can usually spend the early portion at home, moving around as they feel most comfortable. An induced labor takes place in a hospital, where a woman will be hooked up to at least one intravenous line and an electronic fetal monitor. In addition, most hospitals don’t allow eating or drinking once induction begins.

“An induced labor may also occur prior to a woman’s body or baby being ready,” Bingham says. “This means labor may take longer and that the woman is two to three times more likely to give birth surgically.” In addition, induced labor frequently leads to further interventions—including epidurals for pain relief, deliveries with the use of forceps or vacuums, and C-sections—that carry risks of their own. For example, a 2011 study found that women who had labor induced without a recognized indication were 67 percent more likely to have a C-section, and their babies were 64 percent more likely to wind up in a neonatal intensive care unit, compared with women allowed to go into labor on their own.

Induction is justified when there’s a medical reason, such as when a woman’s membranes rupture, or her “water breaks,” and labor doesn’t start immediately, or when she’s a week or more past her due date.

5. Ultrasounds after 24 weeks

Unless there is a specific condition your provider is tracking, you don’t need an ultrasound after 24 weeks. Although some practitioners use ultrasounds after this point to estimate fetal size or due date, it’s not a good idea because the margin of error increases significantly as the pregnancy progresses. And the procedure doesn’t provide any additional information leading to better outcomes for either mother or baby, according to a 2009 review of eight trials involving 27,024 women. In fact, the practice was linked to a slightly higher C-section rate.

6. Continuous electronic fetal monitoring

Continuous monitoring, during which you’re hooked up to monitor to record your baby’s heartbeat throughout labor, restricts your movement and increases the chance of a cesarean and delivery with forceps. In addition, it doesn’t reduce the risk of cerebral palsy or death for the baby, research suggests. The alternative is to monitor the baby at regular intervals using an electronic fetal monitor, a handheld ultrasound device, or a special stethoscope. Continuous electronic monitoring is recommended if you’re given oxytocin to strengthen labor, you’ve had an epidural, or you’re attempting a VBAC.

7. Early epidurals

An epidural places anesthesia directly into the spinal canal, so that you remain awake but don’t feel pain below the administration point. But the longer an epidural is in place, the more medication accumulates and the less likely you will be able to feel to push. Epidurals can also slow labor. By delaying administration and using effective labor support strategies, you might be able to get past a tough spot and progress to the point you no longer feel it’s needed. If you do have an epidural, ask the anesthesiologist about a lighter block. “Ideally, a woman should still be able to move her legs and lift her buttocks,” Main says.

8. Routinely rupturing the amniotic membranes

Doctors sometimes rupture the amniotic membranes or “break the waters,” supposedly to strengthen contractions and shorten labor. But the practice doesn’t have that affect and may increase the risk of C-sections, according to a 2009 review of 15 trials involving 5,583 women. In addition, artificially rupturing amniotic membranes can cause rare but serious complications, including problems with the umbilical cord or the baby’s heart rate.

9. Routine episiotomies

Practitioners sometimes make a surgical cut just before delivery to enlarge the opening of the vagina. That can be necessary in the case of a delivery that requires help from forceps or a vacuum, or if the baby is descending too quickly for the tissues to stretch. But in other cases, routine episiotomies don’t help and are associated with several significant problems, including more damage to the perineal area and a longer healing period, according to a 2009 review involving more than 5,000 women.

Allowing healthy infants and moms to stay together right after delivery promotes bonding and breast-feeding.

10. Sending your newborn to the nursery

If your baby has a problem that needs special monitoring, then sending him or her to a nursery or even an intensive care unit is essential. But in other cases, allowing healthy infants and mothers to stay together promotes bonding and breast-feeding. Moms get just as much sleep, research shows, and they learn to respond to the feeding cues of their babies. Allowing mothers and babies to stay together is one of the criteria hospitals must meet to be certified as “baby friendly” by the Baby-Friendly Hospital Initiative, a program sponsored by the World Health Organization (WHO) and the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF).

10 things you should do during your pregnancy

Families don’t have to wait for the whole system to change to seek out practitioners who are already following more patient-centered models of care. “We need to raise women’s awareness that there will be a big difference in how they are cared for depending on who is in charge and what policies are in place,” Bingham says. Below are 10 steps you can take to ensure the best possible experience.

1. Set your due date. If you aren’t positive about the date of conception or your last menstrual period, get an ultrasound early in the pregnancy to establish your due date. Subsequent ultrasounds might suggest other dates, but that first ultrasound provides the most accurate one. “If we aren’t sure about the dates,” Spong says, “it can turn into a real mishmash in the end.”

2. Make a plan—and have a backup. For example, if you’ve had a C-section and would like to consider a vaginal birth, discuss that up front because not all doctors and hospitals provide care for VBACs. A birth plan can help you talk about concerns and desires with your provider and with hospital staff. Look for a template that is current, applicable to your situation, and flexible. Here is an example from the California Pacific Medical Center. But remember that things rarely go exactly as planned, so have a backup in mind. For example, you might want to have a delivery without pain medication, but consider what you will do if it turns out you need it. Finally, think about breast-feeding when planning. “An important thing a mother can do is learn about breast-feeding while she is pregnant,” says Rebecca Mannel, a lactation coordinator at the University of Oklahoma Medical Center. “Providing advice and support prenatally is a key time that is often missed.”

3. Consider a midwife. If your pregnancy is low-risk, consider using a certified midwife, a health professional who can provide a range of women’s health care during pregnancy, childbirth, and the postpartum period. Certified nurse midwives (CNMs) and certfied midwives (CMs) have graduate degrees, have completed an accredited education program, and must pass a national certification exam. CNMs also have a nursing degree. Certified professional midwives (CPMs) have special training in delivering babies outside of hospitals.

Midwives practice in diverse settings—including homes, hospitals, and birthing clinics—and provide many of the same services as physicians, including prescribing medication and ordering tests. The care that midwives provide is based on the philosophy of not intervening unless there is a current or potential health problem. That approach has several benefits, according to a 2009 review of 11 studies involving more than 12,000 women. Women who used midwives were more likely to be cared for in delivery by their primary provider (rather than whoever was on call) and were more likely to have a spontaneous vaginal birth without the need for an epidural, forceps, or vacuum extraction. They are also more likely to report feeling in control during their birth experience and to initiate breast-feeding.

Most health insurance plans cover midwife care and include some in their list of covered providers. The American College of Nurse-Midwives maintains a list of CNMs and CMs. Make sure the midwife you’re considering is licensed to practice in your state. CNMs are licensed in every state, but CPMs and CMs are not.

4. Reduce the risks of an early delivery. Women who have a history of spontaneous premature delivery can reduce the risk of another preterm birth by about one-third by taking a special form of progesterone weekly starting at 16 to 20 weeks. In addition, women with a significant risk of delivering their baby early—due to their water breaking, for example—and who are between 23 and 34 weeks pregnant can reduce risks to the baby by taking corticosteroids such as betamethasone and dexamethasone. If your doctor doesn’t prescribe those medications ask why not, and get a second opinion if necessary.

5. Ask if a breech baby can be turned. Because a baby delivered buttocks- or feet-first can be in danger, many practitioners recommend a C-section when the baby is not coming out head first. But by using a technique called external version, a skilled practitioner can often turn a breech baby in the last weeks of pregnancy. Because it carries some risk—membranes might rupture, for example, or in rare cases the baby can become tangled in the umbilical cord—it should be done in a hospital, where both mother and baby can be monitored closely. With the increasing use of C-sections, some practitioners have little training or experience with the external version procedure. If yours is not, consider asking for a referral to someone who is.

6. Stay at home during early labor. Discuss with your provider at what point in labor your should go to the hospital or maternity center. Don’t be disappointed, though, if the staff checks you and sends you home. “Until a woman’s cervix is dilated to 3 or 4 centimeters, she usually doesn’t need to be in the hospital setting,” Main says. “She’ll usually be more comfortable and labor will even progress more smoothly at home.”

7. Be patient. Mothers are likely to be in labor longer than their grandmothers were, recent research suggests. That may be because they tend to be heavier or older when they give birth, or it may be a side effect of epidural anesthesia. In any case, most doctors learned about the course of labor from timetables set in the 1950s. “Obstetricians may be too quick to intervene because they think labor is not progressing as quickly as it should,” Main says. Talk with your practitioner as well as anyone who will be supporting you in advance about your desire to allow your labor to progress on its own.

8. Get labor support. Women who receive continuous support are in labor for shorter periods and are less likely to need intervention. The most effective support comes from someone who is not a member of the hospital staff and is not in your social network—a doula, or trained birth assistant, for example—according to a systematic review of 21 studies involving more than 15,000 women in a range of circumstances and settings. Ask your provider for a referral, and see if your insurance company will cover doula care.

Placing healthy newborns naked on their mother’s bare chest after birth has many benefits for both.

9. Listen to yourself. Walking, rocking, or moving during contractions, and changing positions between contractions, can make you more comfortable and speed labor along. “Each labor coping strategy, such as walking or showering, tends to last for about 20 minutes,” Main says. “It’s good to plan five or six strategies and then rotate through them.” When it comes time to push, being upright or on your side rather than flat on your back allows your pelvis to open and keeps you working with rather than against gravity. Hollywood-style pushing, in which the woman is coached to hold her breath and push hard according to someone else’s count, turns out to less effective than trusting your instincts. “Self-directed pushing, in which the mother can push when she feels like it in the way that feels right to her, can actually make things go faster,” Bingham says.

10. Touch your newborn. Placing healthy newborns naked on their mother’s bare chest immediately after birth has numerous benefits for both of them, according to a review of 30 studies involving nearly 2,000 mother-infant pairs. Babies that get skin-to-skin contact interact more with their mothers, stay warmer, cry less, and are more likely to be breast-fed and to breast-feed longer than those that are taken away to be cleaned up, measured, and dressed.

5 things to do before you become pregnant

One approach to improving birth outcomes is to focus on improving health before pregnancy. “Entering pregnancy healthy gives you the best possible chance to stay that way yourself and have a healthy baby,” Spong says. “If you have medical problems, get those under control. Get yourself in as good shape as you can for that baby.”

And if you aren’t planning a pregnancy in the near future? There’s no downside to optimizing your health. Plus, over half of all pregnancies are unplanned, so it only makes sense for women who are sexually active to consider their reproductive health.

A two-year collaborative effort by experts from government agencies, national medical organizations, and nonprofits such as the March of Dimes yielded recommendations for health-care providers and consumers to improve preconception health and care. Here are the top five.

1. Take folic acid. Aim for 400 mcg of a day starting at least 3 months before becoming pregnant to cut the risk of neural tube defects by at least half.

2. Stop bad habits. That means smoking, drinking alcohol excessively, and using illegal drugs. Smoking is associated with premature birth, low birth weight, and other pregnancy complications. It’s never safe to smoke or use recreational drugs during pregnancy because those substances can harm the developing fetus even before you realize you are pregnant. Any alcohol during pregnancy—especially during the second half of the first trimester—puts your baby at risk for fetal alcohol syndrome, according to a recent study.

3. Take control of chronic disease. If you have a medical condition such as asthma, diabetes, epilepsy, or high blood pressure, be sure to get it under control. For example, losing excess weight before pregnancy decreases the risk of neural tube defects, preterm delivery, gestational diabetes, blood clots, and other adverse effects. Also be sure that your vaccinations are up to date; rubella (German measles) and chicken pox can cause birth defects and complications if you get them while pregnant.

4. Watch for harmful drugs and supplements. Talk with your doctor and pharmacist about any over-the-counter and prescription medicine you are taking, including vitamins and other dietary or herbal supplements. Some medication, such as the acne drug isotretinoin (Accutane), can cause miscarriages and birth defects and shouldn’t be taken by women who are—or might become—pregnant. For other medication, your doctor may prescribe a lower dosage or an alternative drug.

5. Avoid toxins. Those include hazardous chemicals or potentially infectious materials at work or at home. Stay away from solvents such as paint thinner. Don’t change the litter in your cat’s box; let someone else do it. And avoid handling pet hamsters, mice, and guinea pigs because they can carry a virus that can harm your baby.

Success stories

Laura Sundstrom, New Haven, Conn.

Laura Sundstrom was surprised that her expertise as a nurse midwife didn’t fully prepare her for her own pregnancy and childbirth. “I felt humbled, fresh, naive—less like a midwife and much more like one of my patients taken over by this powerful change happening inside me,” she says.

 

The next surprise was that despite a healthy pregnancy and excellent care, the birth of her first child did not go according to plan. When the baby wouldn’t budge after hours of pushing,she was delivered by C-section. After attending the vaginal births of so many of her patients, Sundstrom expected her own child to come into the world the same way. But she has no regrets. “I feel fortunate in that I had one of those C-sections that is truly medically necessary,” she says.

 

Fast forward three years and Sundstrom, pregnant with her second child, found that not everyone in her professional community was supportive of her choice to again try for a vaginal birth because of the risks she encountered the first time. “Even I had a hard time believing I could go through with it,” says Sundstrom, who put herself in the hands of a skilled colleague who reminded her to “allow for normal.” In addition to her midwife, she also consulted with a team of doctors who were supportive of VBACs, and she and her caregivers put together a comprehensive plan for a hospital birth.

 

This time everything went smoothly, and Sundstrom says the mood in the delivery room was upbeat. In between contractions, she was excited, joyful even, right up until she needed to push. “At that point, all my fears and anxieties came flooding back,” she says. “If I could have gotten up and left, I would have. I just didn’t believe I could do it.” Her midwife then encouraged her to do the same thing Sundstrom had advised so many of her own patients to do—reach down and feel the baby’s head. In that moment, the possibility of a natural birth became real. She recalls feeling “so much calmer, really at peace.”

 

Her son was born about 10 minutes later. “Going into the second birth, I was totally prepared for another C-section and would have been OK with it,” Sundstrom says. “But I didn’t realize until the moment it happened how incredible it was to receive that fresh, warm baby. I was elated. It was fabulous.”

Emily Timmel, Croton-on-Hudson, N.Y.

Emily Timmel’s describes her first pregnancy as totally normal. Although laboring for more than 24 hours had left her exhausted, she was still up for a vaginal birth. She only got to push twice. “The baby was in distress,” she recalls. “The doctor tried a vacuum extraction, but when that didn’t work, I was wheeled into another room for an emergency C-section, and knocked out with gas.” She would learn that her bouncing baby boy was fine when she was reunited with him two hours later.

 

Timmel’s own recovery was complicated by a series of infections at her incision site. “The first two months were pretty rough,” she says. She admits to second-guessing her choices, wondering if she could have done anything to have a vaginal birth. But ultimately she was reassured that because the umbilical cord had been “wrapped like a noose” around her baby’s neck, the doctor took the steps necessary to save his life.

 

Timmel was considered a great candidate for a vaginal birth with her second child because the problems related to her first childbirth were not likely to occur. Still, not everyone was supportive. An obstetrician she knew told her that a VBAC would be unwise,Timmel says. “She told me all these horrible scary stories—that I wouldn’t be able to push the baby out or that my uterus would rupture,” she said.

 

Timmel was reassured by her own maternal-care team that going into labor in a hospital setting was a reasonable option. This time, she came fully prepared. “I engaged a doula for support,” she said. “I also had a wonderfully supportive midwife and husband.” Everything went like clockwork. Labor started at 3 a.m., she went to the hospital at 9 a.m., and by 10:45 a.m. had what she calls “an amazing experience” giving birth to her second son.

 

Timmel credits the hospital she chose for helping to make her second childbirth much better all-around. “Staff at the first hospital started talking to me about interventions from the second I walked in the door,” she says. “They had a very condescending attitude about natural childbirth,” adding that they were also not supportive of breast-feeding and despite her protests kept trying to give the baby a bottle.

 

The difference between that experience and the second hospital was “like night and day” Timmel says. “Every nurse supported me as a mother and supported bonding with my baby, including breast-feeding. It was such a gift.”

Resources

The care you get during pregnancy depends in part on where you live. For example, among 757 hospitals that voluntarily share data, the rate of elective early deliveries ranges from 5 percent to more than 40 percent, according to the Leapfrog Group, a national quality watchdog organization. “What we are seeing is extreme disparities in the quality of care,” says Carol Sakala of Childbirth Connection. “It varies from state to state, from hospital to hospital, and sometimes even within the same hospital.”

The good news is that when there’s a concerted effort to follow best practices, the numbers improve—often significantly. Main, who has developed and led quality-improvement initiatives at 20 hospitals in the Sutter Health system in northern California, says “We’ve reduced the rate of early elective deliveries from 22 percent to 6 percent, with many hospitals at or near zero.” Sutter Health also reduced the rate of episiotomies from 45 percent to 14 percent in first-time births.

How do the hospitals you are considering stack up? Many states make comparison data available to consumers on the web.

Gay Marriage Victories!

Posted on: November 7th, 2012 by Simple Surrogacy No Comments

We wake up this morning to see that even more states have approved on their ballots measures to allow Gay marriage. What a wonderful victory for all Americans for equality! What this means for Surrogacy is simple.

Now many more Americans can have babies with their partners through Surrogacy, then because of the Gay Marriage or Civil Union provisions, return to their home states of Maryland, Maine and hopefully Washington to have their partner adopt their children. We look forward to creating many more families of Pride through Surrogacy and helping those families be legitimate in the eyes of their home state.

Congratulations to the voters in those great states who recognized that everyone should be able to love who they choose.

The Modern Family: Two Great Dads

Posted on: November 6th, 2012 by Simple Surrogacy No Comments

A wonderful article on two of our favorite Fathers, Andy and Evan, and their two beautiful children born through our Surrogacy Program last year. Congratulations to their beautiful family!

 

http://viewer.zmags.com/publication/e005b76b#/e005b76b/42