US gay couple stuck in Thailand with baby, says surrogate won't sign papers

[marquess]

An inflammatory bigot post has been removed as well as the replies to that post.

Anything that is not P.C these days is often deemed inflammatory! Everyone either has to jump on the bandwagon and wave the flags or shut up!

If its the post I'm thinking of it deserved to be removed. It was a foul diatribe of hate, prejudice and bigotry.

I am not sure that you are referring to the post that I made, unless you believe traditional view on the matter constitutes bigotry, prejudice and hatred? For that is all I stated in my post. In the end whilst I try to respect views that are not the same as mine, I do not much care for people saying that I should not be heard due to my views being different, hence the absurdity of PC.

Edited July 29, 2015 by marquess

[Bluespunk]

An inflammatory bigot post has been removed as well as the replies to that post.

Anything that is not P.C these days is often deemed inflammatory! Everyone either has to jump on the bandwagon and wave the flags or shut up!

If its the post I'm thinking of it deserved to be removed. It was a foul diatribe of hate, prejudice and bigotry.

I am not sure that you are referring to the post that I made, unless you believe traditional view on the matter constitutes bigotry, prejudice and hatred? For that is all I stated in my post. In the end whilst I try to respect views that are not the same as mine, I do not much care for people saying that I should not be heard due to my views being different, hence the absurdity of PC.

No. It wasn't a post you made.

It was early on in the topic, it was an ignorant, nasty homophobic rant.

Can't remember the name but it is definitely not your post I am thinking of.

Edited July 29, 2015 by Bluespunk

[Tony125]

It was told 6 months ago that she met the donor and was told the baby was going to a "couple" that couldn't have a baby. When she found out the other person was a guy she said she thought she was helping a normal couple and would not sign to give permission for baby to leave Thailand. She has showed up I think on 2 occasions with police at their hotel (they said they were not there) to get the baby. US embaaasy will not interfer as Thai law trumps US law in Thailand. AS most people know if you are not married to a Thai woman just because your name is on birth certificate gives you no parental rights unless the woman signs and gives permission. They will not be allowed to leave Thailand with the girl. She has not asked for money only wants the kid. IF they request a court desision I think it is highly likely the child will be taken from them at that time.

Some say that's what they get for trying to get a baby on the cheap, they had a surogate and have a boy in India should have gone back there but thought thailand was cheaper.

Edited July 29, 2015 by Tony125

[magnacarta]

If money has already been paid, threaten to sue, and serve her with papers drawn up by an attorney. Scare her. If that does not work, just walk away. Adopt a baby. Get on with your lives.

Easy to say that but one of them does have a biological connection with the baby, and as with any parents, it is "normal" to STRONGLY want to keep such a baby, It is starting to look tragic though. What a mess.

I get the connection, but there is a point at which you just have to say is this worth it? Six months, and tens of thousands of dollars, and when do you say quit? Life is short, and who wants to live in that state of mind? Sometimes, by cutting your losses you come out a winner. And think of how amazing it would be to never have to see that witch again! Just go with adoption. The whole "my own genes" thing is a bit overblown.

Hate to harp on,but Jingthing is still pushing his/her agenda.Not sure which way it leans.I have 4 daughters from normal heterosexual relationships.I maybe the odd MAN out here,but to me that is the way of man/woman.I respect that he/she is allowed to push his/her agenda.Where does the normal people come into the eqauation.Are we seen as non PC and banned,are the minority groups winning.I don't have a problem in your inclintations,just do me a favour and keep them to yourself.I would dearly love to express my true opinion on minority groups,but as the world has gone PC crazy I am limited as to what I can express.I would love to see honest heartfelt replies,if allowed.I suspect there are a few with similar views,but not allowed for various reasons.If this is the case then I think I prove my point.If in doubt look at the rulings in your own country,good example in the UK today

[Bluespunk]

If money has already been paid, threaten to sue, and serve her with papers drawn up by an attorney. Scare her. If that does not work, just walk away. Adopt a baby. Get on with your lives.

Easy to say that but one of them does have a biological connection with the baby, and as with any parents, it is "normal" to STRONGLY want to keep such a baby, It is starting to look tragic though. What a mess.

I get the connection, but there is a point at which you just have to say is this worth it? Six months, and tens of thousands of dollars, and when do you say quit? Life is short, and who wants to live in that state of mind? Sometimes, by cutting your losses you come out a winner. And think of how amazing it would be to never have to see that witch again! Just go with adoption. The whole "my own genes" thing is a bit overblown.

Hate to harp on,but Jingthing is still pushing his/her agenda.Not sure which way it leans.I have 4 daughters from normal heterosexual relationships.I maybe the odd MAN out here,but to me that is the way of man/woman.I respect that he/she is allowed to push his/her agenda.Where does the normal people come into the eqauation.Are we seen as non PC and banned,are the minority groups winning.I don't have a problem in your inclintations,just do me a favour and keep them to yourself.I would dearly love to express my true opinion on minority groups,but as the world has gone PC crazy I am limited as to what I can express.I would love to see honest heartfelt replies,if allowed.I suspect there are a few with similar views,but not allowed for various reasons.If this is the case then I think I prove my point.If in doubt look at the rulings in your own country,good example in the UK today

Normal people? Inclinations? Keep them to yourself? PC gone crazy? Minority groups winning? Normal heterosexual relations?

Can someone call the 1940s and let them know we've found all their prejudices?

[Bluespunk]

For the masters tools will never dismantle the masters house. They may allow us to temporarily beat him at his own game, but they will never enable us to bring about genuine change. Racism and homophobia are real conditions of all our lives in this place and time. I urge each one of us here to reach down into that deep place of knowledge inside herself and touch that terror and loathing of any difference that lives here. See whose face it wears. Then the personal as the political can begin to illuminate all our choices.

Audre Lorde

[greenchair]

My empathy is with the couple.

Seems the lady signed a contract, took the money, and is reneging on the deal. Either she did not read the contract, or has been poorly advised.

She did read the contract.

She signed a contract that she thought was true and correct.

They (deliberately ) omitted information, because they knew it may effect the decision of the surrogate. She is worried about the child and says she would not have agreed if she had known all the information. Another surrogate might agree, but this one did not.

She has offered to give all the money back. These two should be charged with making a contract under false pretences. How dare they inform a surrogate of crucial information after she acted in good faith. This has got nothing to do with being gay. They lied by omission , plain and simple.

[Bluespunk]

My empathy is with the couple.

Seems the lady signed a contract, took the money, and is reneging on the deal. Either she did not read the contract, or has been poorly advised.

She did read the contract.

She signed a contract that she thought was true and correct.

They (deliberately ) omitted information, because they knew it may effect the decision of the surrogate. She is worried about the child and says she would not have agreed if she had known all the information. Another surrogate might agree, but this one did not.

She has offered to give all the money back. These two should be charged with making a contract under false pretences. How dare they inform a surrogate of crucial information after she acted in good faith. This has got nothing to do with being gay. They lied by omission , plain and simple.

It's still their baby.

[greenchair]

My empathy is with the couple.

Seems the lady signed a contract, took the money, and is reneging on the deal. Either she did not read the contract, or has been poorly advised.

She did read the contract.

She signed a contract that she thought was true and correct.

They (deliberately ) omitted information, because they knew it may effect the decision of the surrogate. She is worried about the child and says she would not have agreed if she had known all the information. Another surrogate might agree, but this one did not.

She has offered to give all the money back. These two should be charged with making a contract under false pretences. How dare they inform a surrogate of crucial information after she acted in good faith. This has got nothing to do with being gay. They lied by omission , plain and simple.

It's still their baby.

Not according to the birth certificate.

[magnacarta]

An inflammatory bigot post has been removed as well as the replies to that post.

Anything that is not P.C these days is often deemed inflammatory! Everyone either has to jump on the bandwagon and wave the flags or shut up!

If its the post I'm thinking of it deserved to be removed. It was a foul diatribe of hate, prejudice and bigotry.

It might be interpreted as free speech,but like many controlled forums their opinions are removed for commercial reasons.The more free sites read for more debate rightly or wrongly,at least you are free to respond and be debated unlike some favoured sites,you get my meaning.Give you and others a clue,very quick to comment on anything,and never be removed.

[SantiSuk]

I'm no homophobe, nor of conservative leaning generally. Nature did not provide that sexual and emotional pleasure was purely a boy on girl thing. Nature did however seem to intend that procreation and nurturing was to be a boy on girl thing and plenty of psycholigical study seem to conclude that nurturing from both sexes provides the most balanced development.

[Bluespunk]

My empathy is with the couple.

Seems the lady signed a contract, took the money, and is reneging on the deal. Either she did not read the contract, or has been poorly advised.

She did read the contract.

She signed a contract that she thought was true and correct.

They (deliberately ) omitted information, because they knew it may effect the decision of the surrogate. She is worried about the child and says she would not have agreed if she had known all the information. Another surrogate might agree, but this one did not.

She has offered to give all the money back. These two should be charged with making a contract under false pretences. How dare they inform a surrogate of crucial information after she acted in good faith. This has got nothing to do with being gay. They lied by omission , plain and simple.

It's still their baby.

Not according to the birth certificate.

DNA trumps paper anytime.

[Bluespunk]

An inflammatory bigot post has been removed as well as the replies to that post.

Anything that is not P.C these days is often deemed inflammatory! Everyone either has to jump on the bandwagon and wave the flags or shut up!

If its the post I'm thinking of it deserved to be removed. It was a foul diatribe of hate, prejudice and bigotry.

It might be interpreted as free speech,but like many controlled forums their opinions are removed for commercial reasons.The more free sites read for more debate rightly or wrongly,at least you are free to respond and be debated unlike some favoured sites,you get my meaning.Give you and others a clue,very quick to comment on anything,and never be removed.

Hate speech is not opinion, it is ignorant prejudice. No one is entitled to that. We are all entitled to informed opinion. No one is entitled to spread bigotry and prejudice. Edited July 30, 2015 by Bluespunk

[Bluespunk]

I'm no homophobe, nor of conservative leaning generally. Nature did not provide that sexual and emotional pleasure was purely a boy on girl thing. Nature did however seem to intend that procreation and nurturing was to be a boy on girl thing and plenty of psycholigical study seem to conclude that nurturing from both sexes provides the most balanced development.

Many studies have found that it makes no difference if children are raised in same sex or mixed sex families.

What is required is a safe, loving, caring, stable, secure and supportive home environment.

[luk AJ]

I'm no homophobe, nor of conservative leaning generally. Nature did not provide that sexual and emotional pleasure was purely a boy on girl thing. Nature did however seem to intend that procreation and nurturing was to be a boy on girl thing and plenty of psycholigical study seem to conclude that nurturing from both sexes provides the most balanced development.

Many studies have found that it makes no difference if children are raised in same sex or mixed sex families.

What is required is a safe, loving, caring, stable, secure and supportive home environment.

absolutely, but I am very happy I had a mother and a father.

[RubberBroke]

I think the main issue here is the legal one and not the fact that the couple are gay.

1. Was proper disclosure made about the couple in the contract?

Maybe yes/maybe no.

2. The child is half Thai. Are we misusing the term surrogacy? Is it her egg? If it is, then she is the biological mother as well.

Sadly without complete facts any opinions expressed are jumping to conclusions.

For the childs sake I hope this matter is amicably resolved at the earliest.

Edited July 30, 2015 by RubberBroke

[Jingthing]

Maybe read background first.

NO!

It is well known that this married couple being a same sex couple was NOT mentioned in the agreement.

I don't see why that is such a big deal.

True, same sex marriage is not legal in Thailand but it is in the USA and the surrogate was carrying a baby for a LEGALLY MARRIED couple who would be residing outside Thailand.

If one was black and one was white, should that have been disclosed in case the surrogate is a racist?

Also.
NO!

It was NOT the surrogate's egg. Of course that would be very relevant if it was. But it wasn't.

I do agree this is largely a LEGAL matter now and the surrogate being Thai and the married couple being foreigners especially considering ALL surrogate birthing for foreign parents has now become ILLEGAL in Thailand (before it wasn't), I reckon the odds this couple can take THEIR baby home are very slim.

Next ...

Edited July 30, 2015 by Jingthing

[RubberBroke]

Maybe read background first.

NO!

It is well known that this married couple was a same sex couple was NOT mentioned in the contract.

I don't see why that is such a big deal.

True same sex marriage is not legal in Thailand but it is in the USA and the surrogate was carrying a baby for a LEGALLY MARRIED couple who would be residing outside Thailand.

If one was black and one was white, should that have been disclosed in case the surrogate is a racist?

Also.

NO!

It was NOT the surrogates egg.

Next ...

Thanks for the clarity.

In an Utopian world things like this should not matter.

Since she is only the surrogate this is then purely a commecial transaction for a service. Therefore the contract is all that matters.

It happened in Thailand so Thai laws apply.

Maybe read background first.

NO!

It is well known that this married couple was a same sex couple was NOT mentioned in the contract.

I don't see why that is such a big deal.

True same sex marriage is not legal in Thailand but it is in the USA and the surrogate was carrying a baby for a LEGALLY MARRIED couple who would be residing outside Thailand.

If one was black and one was white, should that have been disclosed in case the surrogate is a racist?

Also.

NO!

It was NOT the surrogates egg.

I do agree this is largely a LEGAL matter now and the surrogate being Thai and the married couple being foreigners especially considering ALL surrogate birthing for foreign parents has now become ILLEGAL in Thailand (before it wasn't), I reckon the odds this couple can take THEIR baby home are very slim.

Next ...

[Patsycat]

They look like a nice couple, and their children are beautiful. (there is a piccie on the Gay Forum, or there was).

Carmen was born in February, wasn't she? They should have grabbed her and ran when they could. But being good parents, they wanted to do everything right. And may not have know about the laws changing today.

I really hope that this story has a good ending, these guys seem to have alot to offer to that little one. Her brother is also a surrogate child.

Plus the fact, they have not given up and gone home in the six months since her birth. That shows dedication.

[Jingthing]

It's a shame because clearly the Daddies are great and loving parents. They won't give up until this fight is totally lost. Which it appears it will be.

[Patsycat]

Maybe they should get the egg donor involved. But she's probably a lesbian friend of theirs!! That would really put a spanner in the works.

Not joking.

[asean]

Living in Thailand sure opens one's eyes to local prejudices... this isn't about sexual orientation, it's about discriminating against rich farangs! Have they even tried offering more baht? Buyer beware when in a "business" environment without any regulations.

But on the flip side, why are these characters buying designer pets when the shelters are putting down soi dogs? The orphanages here are overflowing and it would be so easy to go and pick up one of the million babies that are just looking for someone to love them!

The bureaucracy involved with dealing with agencies from two governments will take years and maybe up to 10 times as much in undertable money. This is why the orphanages here stay full.

[nottocus]

Poor kid. A greedy b**** of a mum or gay parents. Sad.

Edited July 31, 2015 by nottocus

[Jingthing]

Poor kid. A greedy b**** of a mum or gay parents. Sad.

Bigotry is sad.

[Patsycat]

Sad, that, in this day and age that bigotry and homophobia still exists.

So, to all you hetero men. A question. If you and your darling wife were not able to have a child naturally. What would you do? Would you adopt - takes years.

Or go the surrogacy route? Lots of people have and have been very happy without problems.

This young lady seems to like the media attention. When that peters off, and she is sitting there without signing the papers for Carmen and getting a bit bored, and no money coming in... and baby is not even with her.

Why is that? It seems the baby is with her father? And has been for six months.

Strength to the fathers for battling this out for the past six months.

[luk AJ]

Sad, that, in this day and age that bigotry and homophobia still exists.

So, to all you hetero men. A question. If you and your darling wife were not able to have a child naturally. What would you do? Would you adopt - takes years.

Or go the surrogacy route? Lots of people have and have been very happy without problems.

This young lady seems to like the media attention. When that peters off, and she is sitting there without signing the papers for Carmen and getting a bit bored, and no money coming in... and baby is not even with her.

Why is that? It seems the baby is with her father? And has been for six months.

Strength to the fathers for battling this out for the past six months.

It depends what your understanding of homophobia is. When I say "I am happy I had a father and a mother" is this these days also concidered as homophobic?

[Patsycat]

Not at all, I also had a father and mother. But i probably would have been just as happy with two dads or two mums.

To me, homophobia is the hate that some people have against gays. As if they are frightened of them, in some sort of strange way. Also, through their ignorance they seem to think that all gay guys are paedophiles, which is very far from the truth.

[Tony125]

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/order-to-take-baby-from-lesbian-couple-reversed/ar-BBmVK9U?li=AA54ur

SALT LAKE CITY — A Utah judge reversed his decision to take a baby girl away from her lesbian foster parents and place her with a heterosexual couple after his ruling caused widespread backlash, but child welfare officials say the change could be temporary.

Judge Scott Johansen signed an order, which was released Friday, that will allow the 9-month-old baby to stay for now with April Hoagland and Beckie Peirce, a married couple who live in the city of Price.

It comes after Johansen said in court Tuesday that the baby should be removed from the couple's home within a week. Utah officials and the couple filed court challenges demanding that the judge rescind the order.

Ashley Sumner, spokeswoman for the Utah Division of Child and Family Services, said the agency is cautiously optimistic and relieved. But Johansen's decision still leaves open the possibility that he could order the child removed at a Dec. 4 custody hearing, she said.

"We're moving in the right direction, but it's not the final answer," Sumner said.

In his first ruling, Johansen mentioned research that said children do better when raised by heterosexual families and that "same-sex marriages have double the rate of instability as heterosexual marriages."

That language was crossed out in Johansen's new order. It now says the court merely cited concerns that research has shown children are more emotionally and mentally stable when raised by a mother and father in the same home.

[Tony125]

https://www.yahoo.com/news/gay-couple-awaits-custody-battle-verdict-thai-surrogate-062448643.html

Gay couple wins custody battle against Thai surrogate mother

NATTASUDA ANUSONADISAI,Associated Press

BANGKOK (AP) — A same-sex American-Spanish couple won a high-profile custody battle Tuesday against a surrogate mother in Thailand who gave birth to their child but then decided she wanted to keep the baby when she found out they were gay.

Bangkok's Juvenile and Family Court ruled that the legal guardian of the 15-month-old child, named Carmen, is her American biological father, Gordon Lake, said Lake's lawyer Rachapol Sirikulchit.

"The court has granted legal custody of Carmen Lake to Gordon Lake, my client, and (said) that my client is her only guardian," Rachapol said.

Lake and his partner, Spaniard Manuel Santos, both 41, have been stuck in Thailand since launching their legal battle after Carmen was born in January 2015.

Santos emerged from the court smiling and with tears in his eyes.

"We won," he told reporters. "We are really happy. ... This nightmare is going to end soon."

"After 15 months, Carmen will fly to Spain," where the couple lives, Santos said.

Rachapol said the couple would not be able to take Carmen out of the country right away pending the possibility of an appeal by the surrogate mother, Patidta Kusolsang. She was not in court and her intentions could not immediately be learned.

Lake and Santos celebrated their legal victory on the "Bringcarmenhome" Facebook page set up to support their custody fight.

"There is no way to express with words what we are feeling!" they posted. "We are crying, our family is crying, our friends are crying, and we are sure all the Thai people who showed their love for us during this time are crying too."

"Today is a huge day for love, for family and for truth. And it is also a big day for LGBT rights," said their posting, referring to lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender rights.

The case was seen as complicated by the fact that Thai law does not recognize same-sex marriages and also by a new law that bans commercial surrogacy, which took effect after Carmen's birth. Rachapol said the court's ruling was based on a transitory clause in the law allowing the intended parents of any baby born before the law took effect to request to be the legal parents.

When Carmen was born, Patidta handed over the baby to Lake and Santos, who left the hospital with the infant. But they say Patidta then changed her mind and refused to sign the documents to allow Carmen to get a passport so they could leave Thailand.

Lake, who is from New Jersey, is Carmen's biological father, while the egg came from an anonymous donor, not Patidta. Neither he nor Carmen were in court Tuesday.

Lake and Santos were told Patidta had thought they were an "ordinary family and that she worried for Carmen's upbringing," according to a message Lake posted on a crowdfunding site that has raised $36,000 to help cover the costs of the trial and staying in Thailand.

Lake has said he doesn't know why the surrogate says she didn't realize they were gay. He says he was clear about that from the start with their surrogacy agency, New Life, which has branches in several countries.

The Bangkok-based New Life office has closed since commercial surrogacy was outlawed in Thailand in July 2015, following several high-profile scandals. There was a grace period provided for parents whose babies were already on the way.

Carmen has lived since birth with the couple, who also have a toddler son, Alvaro, born to a surrogate mother in India with Santos the biological father.

They said in their Facebook posting that the family will live in Valencia, Spain, but that they love Thailand and promised to come back often.

"Carmen is half Thai and we are very very proud of that," they said. "Right now, we just want to go back to our normal lives and try to rebuild what we can, so that Alvaro and Carmen can have the wonderful lives that they were always meant to have."

[Jingthing]

He definitely looks the part of DADDY. Woof.