Today, two very different online news sources published articles on the same topic: surrogacy.

People.com reported that Kim Kardashian and Kanye West are expecting their third child, this time with the help of a surrogate. Meanwhile, Public Discourse published an article about a surrogacy case that has been filed with the United States Supreme Court.

With the convergence of these two stories – one hitting the pop-culture news cycle, and the other raising important legal questions before our nation’s highest court – it’s likely surrogacy will gain greater salience in our cultural dialogue. In the process, it might become the next controversial hot topic along with things like same-sex marriage, abortion, and religious freedom.

There are two main types of surrogacy. The first is traditional surrogacy in which the surrogate mother provides the egg and the “commissioning father,” provides the sperm to fertilize the egg. In this case the baby is genetically related to the surrogate mother. The second type of surrogacy is when the biological mother and father’s fertilized eggs are implanted in a surrogate via IVF. This is the type of surrogacy that the Kardashian-West family is using.

According to reports, Kim and Kanye pursued surrogacy because of Kim’s painful and difficult pregnancies with their first two children, North, 4, and Saint, 21 months.

In general, surrogacy is seen in a positive light because it provides couples who have struggled with infertility, or for whom pregnancy is too dangerous, another opportunity to have children. Sadly, it has a darkside.

The darkside of surrogacy is perfectly highlighted in the case that may be taken up by the U.S. Supreme Court: M.C. v. C.M.

In this case, the buyer is C.M. He is a fifty year-old single deaf and mute postal work from Georgia. Using his sperm, 13 embryos were created using eggs purchased from anonymous sellers. Three eggs were successfully implanted in the surrogate.

Difficulties for this case began when all three of the implanted embryos were healthy and viable. Although C.M. initially accepted there would be three children instead of one, he later changed his mind and demanded the surrogate abort one of the children, and put one up for adoption. She refused, and even offered to take the two children that he did not want. The buyer refused her offer though, and instead threatened her with a lawsuit.

And their problems continued. The surrogate required increased monitoring and medical care because of the high risk nature of the pregnancy. The buyer complained that the surrogate should reduce her visits because they were costing him too much money.

After the babies were born on February 22, 2016, the surrogate was not allowed to see the babies, to breastfeed them, or even know their condition. Most concerningly, despite the buyer’s acknowledgement that he could not provide or care for the three children, the lower courts dismissed any arguments concerning the children’s best interests when the Judge said, “What is going to happen to these children once they are handed over to C.M. [the buyer], that’s none of my business.”

“Surrogacy is creating a generation of children severed from biological and genetic identity and a breeder class of marginalized women. Both are being transformed into commodities for sale on the global marketplace… When the primal bond – as ancient as humankind itself – between mother and child is destroyed, what will be left?” – Kathleen Sloan

Hallie Hamilton

Hallie Hamilton

Hallie is the former Communication Director of Nebraska Family Alliance. She likes her coffee black, her bike-rides long, and her books epic.