A legal battle has cast an unflattering light on the ugly business of surrogacy as well as on the eugenicist mentality that predominates in Canada — a country whose health care system was founded by a eugenicist, where euthanasia is now a leading cause of death, and where there are no legal limits on abortion.According to a damning new report from the National Post in which the names of parties involved were withheld, a homosexual couple is suing a surrogate mother who two years ago refused their request to abort the baby boy over whom they now have legal custody.’They are suing the woman who brought their son to them.’The lawsuit, filed in Ontario Superior Court in May, alleges that the surrogate mother failed to keep the gay couple informed about the health status of the baby, endangered the baby, caused the homosexuals so much emotional distress that one missed work for two months, and violated the plaintiffs’ confidentiality, reported the Post.The target of the lawsuit, a resident of Ontario’s Muskoka region who works as a correctional officer, has denied all of the allegations and told the Post, “You know I’m a single mom, you know I have a daughter, and you’re basically suing me for my house. It seems very s***ty, it’s just awful.””I just feel used,” continued the woman, who claimed that the plaintiffs have indicated they are seeking roughly $600,000 in damages. “They didn’t get the perfect child they wanted, and they threw me away.”It is unlawful under Canada’s Assisted Human Reproduction Act to pay a woman to be a surrogate mother or to pay to arrange the services of a surrogate mother. Surrogacy is not, however, prohibited “so long as a surrogate mother in Canada makes this decision for altruistic reasons (i.e., without financial or other gain).”A surrogate mother can only be repaid for out-of-pocket costs directly related to her pregnancy.RELATED: ‘There is no mama’: How a viral video accidentally exposed the true cost of gay adoption BSIP/Education Images/Universal Images Group/Getty ImageThe surrogate mother targeted by the lawsuit told the Post that she became interested in surrogacy after seeing a pair of close friends face reproductive obstacles.After her profile was shared on the website of the referral organization Surrogacy in Canada Online, the woman was inundated with messages from individuals seeking her services, she claimed. Following an extensive screening process, she ultimately entered a contract with the homosexual couple now suing her.According to the surrogate mother who underwent in-vitro fertilization with embryos produced with a donor egg and each of the homosexual’s sperm, her relationship with the couple was positive until June 2024, when she informed them that an ultrasound indicated the baby had a cleft lip and potentially a cleft palate and minor heart defect as well.The couple said in a letter reviewed by the Post, “Considering that medical tests indicate that the fetus has, or is likely to have, a genetic, chromosomal or other abnormality or defect, and in accordance with article 8.5 (a) of our surrogacy agreement … we want to inform you of our wish that the pregnancy be terminated.””Although very difficult, this decision is free and informed,” added the couple, which is being represented by Jonathan Lancaster, a litigator at the Toronto-headquartered firm Fasken.While proposed legislation criminalizing the coercion of pregnant women to abort their babies was defeated in 2010, Juliet Guichon, a bioethics professor at the University of Calgary, told the Post that Canadian law makes clear that the decision of whether to abort a baby ultimately rests with the expectant mother.The surrogate mother refused to kill the 22-week-old baby over what she regarded as a superficial condition.After hearing from doctors at Mount Sinai Hospital that the baby was generally healthy, the homosexual couple allegedly greenlit the continuation of the pregnancy.The relationship between the surrogate mother and the homosexual couple continued to deteriorate when the woman decided to keep to the original plan of having the baby delivered at home by midwives.The surrogate mother noted that the child had breathing problems on delivery but was provided oxygen by the midwives and then promptly taken to a hospital.The homosexual couple who sought the baby’s death ended up taking him home, then effectively suspended contact with the surrogate, according to the mother.Under Ontario’s All Families Are Equal Act, “the child ceases to be the child of the surrogate and the surrogate ceases to be a parent of the child” if the surrogate has entered into a surrogacy agreement before the child is conceived, has received independent legal advice in advance of entering the agreement, and the child is conceived through assisted reproduction.The surrogate mother only enjoys the rights and responsibilities of a parent with respect to the child until the baby is 7 days old.RELATED: Britain’s first homosexual ‘parent’ via baby purchase charged with rape, sexual exploitation PATRICK T. FALLON/AFP/Getty ImagesAfter repeated requests for her outstanding expenses — including for lost income and transportation costs — allegedly went unanswered, the surrogate mother attempted to take the homosexual couple to small-claims court only to discover that her surrogacy contract required the resolution of such disputes by arbitration.’The practice of surrogacy itself cannot be reconciled with the dignity and rights of the two persons it most directly concerns.’The Post reported that the homosexual couple subsequently filed a lawsuit, alleging that the mother put the baby’s health at risk by negligent behavior and by “failing to follow the (parents’) direction regarding decisions affecting the fetus’ medical care”; violated their confidentiality; and caused them emotional distress.Blaze News did not immediately receive a response from the couple’s attorney.”What I find most difficult in this is they are suing the woman who brought their son to them,” Sally Rhoads-Heinrich, the owner of Surrogacy in Canada Online, told the Post. “How is their son going to feel some day if he learns that?”Guichon, who emphasized that the homosexual couple sought to end the baby’s life over a medical condition that “can be completely overcome by surgery and therapy,” noted that “the question arises as to whether it is in the best interests of the child to be raised by these people.”A political declaration calling for the global abolition of surrogacy was launched at a high-level side event at the U.N. Human Rights Council last month co-hosted by the Vatican and the governments of Italy, Chile, and Cameroon.”The practice of surrogacy itself cannot be reconciled with the dignity and rights of the two persons it most directly concerns,” said Archbishop Ettore Balestrero, an Italian prelate of the Catholic Church who works in the diplomatic service of the Holy See.”The human person can never be the basis of a commercial contract. Every child has the right to an origin that is fully human. And under the convention on the rights of the child, the child also has the right to preserve his or her identity and as far as possible to know and be cared for by his or her parents,” continued Balestrero. “Surrogacy equally violates the dignity of the woman. It is rarely the privileged who carry children for others. The market of surrogacy is built overwhelmingly on the material need of women in situations of poverty and economic vulnerability.”Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
FOX NEWS
The sun is out for now, the Canadian wildfire
