Criticize Elizabeth Anderson's Claim that the Autonomy of Women will Essay

Criticize Elizabeth Andersons Claim that the Autonomy of Women will be Promoted by Banning Commercial Surrogacy Contracts - shew ExampleIf the intended start has the ability to produce eggs that are fertile but is ineffectual to carry the pregnancy then gestational surrogacy can be routined. In this act upon, the egg of the intended mother would be removed and combined with that of the husband or a sperm from another man and at long last implanted in the replacement mother. Surrogacy sights can be either unselfish or commercial. In altruistic surrogacy, the surrogate mother would be compensated for expenses incurred or sometimes not paid at all. On the other hand, the surrogate would be paid all expenses incurred during the entire period of the pregnancy plus a fee in commercial surrogacy. In this surrogacy, the surrogate mother and the adoptive parents come up with a commercial surrogacy contract that regulates their relationship for the entire period of the pregnancy. Critic ism I disagree with Elizabeth Andersons yell that the autonomy of women would be promoted by illegalise commercial surrogacy contracts. As a matter of fact, commercial surrogacy has enabled many another(prenominal) infertile couples in the entire world to have children. There exist few children for toleration and eventide the requirements for one to qualify as an adoptive parent are hard to meet. Therefore, commercial surrogacy remains the lone(prenominal) hope for some individuals to get children and make up families. It is the only humane answer to the infertility problem. infertility is extremely common in the world it affects approximately one out of seven couples. This problem is seeming to increase since more women are entering a time consuming workforce, and thus delay the process of giving birth to a later age when fertility challenges are exceedingly rampant (Richards 78). Consequently, adoption does not sufficiently meet the desires of infertile couples wishing to have a baby. There exist no biological link amidst the couple and the adopted baby they would be forced to wait between three and seven years to adopt an infant. This has contributed to a call for another reproductive option. Moreover, abortion and the use of contraceptives have led to a serious shortage in the number of adoptable babies. If we follow Elizabeth Andersons argument, then we leave many infertile couples without children. Commercial surrogacy is not a practice of baby merchandising as Anderson argues. It is a contract to bear a child but not to sell the child. The honorarium to a surrogate is just a fee for the services just similar to the fees paid to doctors and lawyers for their services. The banning of commercial surrogacy will be infringing on ones constitutional proficient to engage into a contract freely. The fraternity is always at peace when the liberty of its members becomes maximized. Women and the entire society benefit from the freedom of choice that wo uld be offered through surrogacy. Since people would not be forced into the contract, they engage willingly no one should set about to stop them. In a rights based culture, commercial surrogacy contracts would be supported since every woman has the right to procreate. She also has the right to demand compensation for expenses incurred during the gestation period. All parties benefit in a surrogacy arrangement that is successful. The intended parents go home with a cherished child while the surrogate mother gets pecuniary reward for her work (Richards 71). The money the surrogate mot