Gay couple wins custody battle against Thai surrogate mother

[richard_smith237]

There are too many bigoted, oppressive, backward and downright offensive opinions on here to get into yet another debate regarding what I can only see as a positive outcome for common sense and keeping a family unit together....

Congratulations to the Family and to the legal system which avoided bigotry and backwards thinking.

So you think a child being "created" for two blokes is in a child's best interest..?..

I see nothing wrong in planning for an enjoying a happy family.... I know many happy couples who've 'created' a family (IVF), usually more conventional as Husband and Wife...

Having read the media reports and interviews I have no doubt that the Childs best interest will always be closest to the hearts of her parents.

The only issue I foresee is when bigoted opinions are forced upon the family - This is not the fault of the happy family, but the fault of those few in society who have lacked social development, remained stuck in the past and feel the need to force their opinions on an innocent family who are causing no harm to anyone else.

Of course - this debate is just that, a debate on an anonymous internet forum:

Transom: You are a respected member of TV.com and I have enjoyed many of your posts in the past - In fact I remember received a verbal bo!!oking from you regarding a tasteless comment I made a few years ago. It rather surprises me that you are not more open minded about this topic.

Its perfectly acceptable to be a motor-head and also tolerate things which may otherwise conflict with the motor-head stereotype !!

It is clear that this child will grow up in a very loving environment - many children around the World would clearly be very lucky to be given the chance to grow up in such a family.

This topic is re-hashing old arguments heavily debated in this linked thread below.

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/905172-gay-parents-fight-for-custody-with-surrogate-in-thailand/

Biology is quite simple and so is evolution for that matter. I'm pretty sure nature knows better than "socially developed societies". In the so called "socially developed societies" you now have really brain dead stuff like "none binary flowergenders".

I agree with your comment: 'Biology is quite Simple and so is Evolution'... for we have evolved, we have evolved and our intelligence permits us do many wondrous things, since 1978 we have been able to conceive through IVF.

Unless of course you'd begrudge childless couples the option to have their own child through IVF because you consider it not natural.

Medicine has advanced our biology - we can replace heart valve where pure nature alone would result in death, we can replace hips and knees, we can perform life saving surgery, we rely on antibiotics and have eradicated numerous deadly diseases with the use of drugs and modern technology...

What about breast milk? Some mothers have been unable to nurse their child and have to rely on breast milk, this child would have potentially died in periods past, but now we have developed Milk-Formula for infants - Is that natural ???

So, by natural do you mean nature as it was in the past ? before technology? before we ourselves evolved ?... Isn't our evolution also natural ?

You see, if you are using this argument it is perhaps because you haven't evolved. Like many of the arguments placed forwards in this topic, many are so fundamentally flawed...

...What you really mean is you don't believe Gay Men should be roll models for kids, but can't find an intelligent and articulate argument to front your opinions....

Edited April 27, 2016 by richard_smith237

[Jingthing]

A truly sickening result obtained through a legal loophole. Fortunately this practice is now illegal in Thailand so we won't be seeing this again.

For foreigners.

I'm not clear on surrogacy laws for Thais though. I think it probably is still legal here for Thais.

Most surrogacy contracts done in the world are done by infertile heterosexual married couples. As in INDIA.

The problem same sex couples have is that they can't enter such a contract as a married couple in places where same sex marriage isn't legal so if they want surrogacy they need to find a place where it can be done with a contract with a "SINGLE" person, as happened in this Thailand case.

Also keep in mind ADOPTION by same sex couples isn't legal in most nations either.

But have some perspective about this.

Most gay men aren't ever going to want to have kids, adopted or otherwise, but that desire is more common with lesbian couples who often already have kids from previous relationships with men.

In the case of this married Spanish-American couple, I think the surrogacy was not possible in Spain, where they live. It may have been possible in the USA, but more costly of course.

So don't bother asking, why didn't they do this in the USA, if possible ... they didn't and the baby from the surrogacy in Thailand EXISTS, so that's a MOOT POINT.

Surrogacy for gays became a global news story during the big Nepal earthquake as there were a number of gay Israelis (and single women Israelis) who were caught up in that as they had surrogacy contracts (as a single man or woman) and/or existing babies. These Israelis could not do the surrogacy in Israel but possibly that might change in the wake of the publicity of that event.

Edited April 27, 2016 by Jingthing

[Bluespunk]

Amazing!

All these bigots, who pretend to have the best for the child at heart!

So: here is a child, who will have parents who will love her, care for her, give her (probably) a good life, full of opportunities...and all you have a problem with is "two-dads-no-mom"?

Seriously?

A human being was created to appease a couple of blokes, and you think that is in a new born best interest...

Answer me this, the kid grows up..."Where is my mum".........?

Now what are these two blokes going to reply....Tell me.....

Exactly, not much different from Dr. Frankenstein creating a monster for his own selfish motives.

This is not a normal child, these are not normal men. How on earth could two adult men be so selfish beats me. They should have bought a poodle and dressed it in pink.

They are meddling in the natural law of evolution, if there is such a thing. Shame on them and any other gay couple demanding rights that they are not deserving.

Shame on the people here defending such a perverse situation.

Nonsense.

[Bluespunk]

Good for them.

Shame on all the bigoted dinosaurs here.

Lats time i checked buying and selling humans was you know... like illegal.

It is.

So what has that got to do with anything?

Have you wandered onto the the wrong thread?

So it's different buying/selling fetuses? Because hey, it's only a human when it actually is born right?

One of the men who is parenting their daughter is the sperm donor. In biological terms it is his child. He neither bought nor sold the child. You are equating this case with human trafficking. While I do have personal qualms about overseas surrogacy it is not the same as human trafficking. Only your hate allows you to view it as such.

Edited April 27, 2016 by Bluespunk

[Bluespunk]

As far as a possible appeal, on what grounds would the appeal be made? Didn't the surrogate woman already make her case, which was lost? So wouldn't there have to be something new to show? So an appeal would most likely lose. But I can see that one benefit of an appeal would be to DRAG this out even longer hoping the parents just get worn down by time and money being stuck in Thailand.

So because it's about a gay couple you don't think the woman should be able to appeal? Do you have this same view about anything court related?

She has no genetic or biological link to the child.

Edited April 27, 2016 by Bluespunk

[Khon Kaen Dave]

Whilst i do not necessarily agree with it.Its good to see two ferangs getting justice in this country.

[Jingthing]

Whilst i do not necessarily agree with it.Its good to see two ferangs getting justice in this country.

Yeah, but technically speaking it was only ONE foreigner actually involved legally in this matter. The biological father who entered into the surrogacy arrangement with the surrogate woman.

I am kind of confused by the announcement of the winning American national who intimated this was some kind of win for gay civil rights. I'm not sure how. Obviously such surrogacy contracts with foreigners of any description are already illegal here. So has it changed things for GLBT Thai nationals? I don't see how. They can't legally marry. Lesbian couples, for example. with a child can't both share full parental rights under Thai laws. Where is the advance? Maybe there is that I don't see. Perhaps about single person adoption (or surrogacy) here for single Thais not being discriminated against based on GLBT status. But even that seems like an optimistic take on it. It's just one case. No change in legislation.

Edited April 27, 2016 by Jingthing

[jak2002003]

If you want to have children get into a relationship with the opposite sex. If you choose to be in a gay relationship then the natural consequence is that it should be childless. That is the choice you make being gay.

your ignorance is truly astonishing.

People don't choose to be gay.. but you choose to show yourself as a complete moron.

Edited April 27, 2016 by jak2002003

[SoiBiker]

Another depressing Thaivisa thread where aging bigots are given a platform for their outdated, unpleasant opinions.

[Bluespunk]

Another depressing Thaivisa thread where aging bigots are given a platform for their outdated, unpleasant opinions.

Why would a bigot have to be aging?

Bigots come in all shapes and sizes and believe it or not ages.

Do not assume all those beyond a certain age are bigots, because that is in itself a form of prejudicial thinking.

Edited April 27, 2016 by Bluespunk

[Kaalle]

There are too many bigoted, oppressive, backward and downright offensive opinions on here to get into yet another debate regarding what I can only see as a positive outcome for common sense and keeping a family unit together....

Congratulations to the Family and to the legal system which avoided bigotry and backwards thinking.

So you think a child being "created" for two blokes is in a child's best interest..?..

I see nothing wrong in planning for an enjoying a happy family.... I know many happy couples who've 'created' a family (IVF), usually more conventional as Husband and Wife...

Having read the media reports and interviews I have no doubt that the Childs best interest will always be closest to the hearts of her parents.

The only issue I foresee is when bigoted opinions are forced upon the family - This is not the fault of the happy family, but the fault of those few in society who have lacked social development, remained stuck in the past and feel the need to force their opinions on an innocent family who are causing no harm to anyone else.

Of course - this debate is just that, a debate on an anonymous internet forum:

Transom: You are a respected member of TV.com and I have enjoyed many of your posts in the past - In fact I remember received a verbal bo!!oking from you regarding a tasteless comment I made a few years ago. It rather surprises me that you are not more open minded about this topic.

Its perfectly acceptable to be a motor-head and also tolerate things which may otherwise conflict with the motor-head stereotype !!

It is clear that this child will grow up in a very loving environment - many children around the World would clearly be very lucky to be given the chance to grow up in such a family.

This topic is re-hashing old arguments heavily debated in this linked thread below.

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/905172-gay-parents-fight-for-custody-with-surrogate-in-thailand/

Biology is quite simple and so is evolution for that matter. I'm pretty sure nature knows better than "socially developed societies". In the so called "socially developed societies" you now have really brain dead stuff like "none binary flowergenders".

Nature and evolution knows better and socially developed societies are wrong in every sense? Ok my friend first step throw out your computer, make a set of clothes out of leaves and branches then walk over to you neighbor and have a fight to the death over the food in his fridge, oh and kidnap his wife as well and drag her to your cave. Then you can make a baby the natural way! The kid can grow up in the cave and be happy, not being subjected to the horrors of modern life, like the prospect of same sex parents.

One logical theory might be socially developed societies are part of evolution.

[Jingthing]

Another thought.

Perhaps an aspect where this case might be seen as a gay civil rights win IN Thailand is that the case has been in Thai press for a very long time and the public can see very clearly that this committed gay male married couple are exemplary human beings who care deeply about the "family values" of keeping, caring for, and loving THEIR child and they were willing to undergo great sacrifices to make that happen. So sort of a PR thing. Doesn't change any laws in Thailand, but that's certainly something.

To add, while I know that legalizing same sex marriage is not a hot issue in Thailand for various cultural difference reasons, a reason why it might be more important here is in consideration of the children of GLBT Thais that already exist or will exist. More common with lesbians. Surely it is better for such children that both parents have full parental rights? As it stands now, that's legally impossible in Thailand.

Edited April 27, 2016 by Jingthing

[JUDAS]

I rarely post on TV anymore but reading this thread has got my back up. I consider myself a "family man" and as such I'm delighted with the result of this court case as a child will now be raised by 2 people who are obviously totally devoted to her. Bravo

[SoiBiker]

I rarely post on TV anymore but reading this thread has got my back up. I consider myself a "family man" and as such I'm delighted with the result of this court case as a child will now be raised by 2 people who are obviously totally devoted to her. Bravo

You are right, but the kid should never have never been put in this situation..

Of having two loving parents willing to fight for it?

Some kids should be so lucky.

[JUDAS]

I rarely post on TV anymore but reading this thread has got my back up. I consider myself a "family man" and as such I'm delighted with the result of this court case as a child will now be raised by 2 people who are obviously totally devoted to her. Bravo

You are right, but the kid should never have never been put in this situation..

So you agree the outcome was the best for the child then. I wasn't feeling that from your posts and I'm glad I was wrong.

[Kaalle]

It would be interesting if the people who are so strongly against the two daddies scenario could provide us with details as to what horrors the child will be subjected to? Dont mention the prospect of bullying, kids are bullied for having glasses and being fat and the solution is not banning glasses.

[Jingthing]

It would be interesting if the people who are so strongly against the two daddies scenario could provide us with details as to what horrors the child will be subjected to? Dont mention the prospect of bullying, kids are bullied for having glasses and being fat and the solution is not banning glasses.

Spain isn't exactly Saudi Arabia or some small redneck town in Texas. For children of same sex parents, the specific location where they are raised does make a difference. But you can that about a lot of differences in families.

[SoiBiker]

I rarely post on TV anymore but reading this thread has got my back up. I consider myself a "family man" and as such I'm delighted with the result of this court case as a child will now be raised by 2 people who are obviously totally devoted to her. Bravo

You are right, but the kid should never have never been put in this situation..

So you agree the outcome was the best for the child then. I wasn't feeling that from your posts and I'm glad I was wrong.

No, the child should never have been "created".....It has "no" mum......

Plenty of kids lack one parent, or even both. Should we just have them put down or something?

[JUDAS]

I rarely post on TV anymore but reading this thread has got my back up. I consider myself a "family man" and as such I'm delighted with the result of this court case as a child will now be raised by 2 people who are obviously totally devoted to her. Bravo

You are right, but the kid should never have never been put in this situation..

So you agree the outcome was the best for the child then. I wasn't feeling that from your posts and I'm glad I was wrong.

No, the child should never have been "created".....It has "no" mum......

You can talk all day long about what should have happened but the reality is what has to be dealt with. So the child is not better off with the gay males who clearly are devoted to her? Is that what you are saying. Would she be better off being raised by the state in an orphanage or by a biological mother who, in this case, doesn't seemed to actually want her. What's best for the child? "The child should never have been created" adds nothing to the reality.

[Jingthing]

Exactly, the custody case was about a lovely child that already EXISTS ... it wasn't a trial about whether the lovely child should have ever existed in the first place. But I'm sure the loving married couple parents are thrilled that she does.

[SoiBiker]

We hear about plenty of pensioner parents here. Those kids are likely to lack a dad fairly early on in life. Is it wrong to create them too?

[SoiBiker]

Is a kid created via the use of Viagra unnatural?

[Asheron]

So you think a child being "created" for two blokes is in a child's best interest..?..

I see nothing wrong in planning for an enjoying a happy family.... I know many happy couples who've 'created' a family (IVF), usually more conventional as Husband and Wife...

Having read the media reports and interviews I have no doubt that the Childs best interest will always be closest to the hearts of her parents.

The only issue I foresee is when bigoted opinions are forced upon the family - This is not the fault of the happy family, but the fault of those few in society who have lacked social development, remained stuck in the past and feel the need to force their opinions on an innocent family who are causing no harm to anyone else.

Of course - this debate is just that, a debate on an anonymous internet forum:

Transom: You are a respected member of TV.com and I have enjoyed many of your posts in the past - In fact I remember received a verbal bo!!oking from you regarding a tasteless comment I made a few years ago. It rather surprises me that you are not more open minded about this topic.

Its perfectly acceptable to be a motor-head and also tolerate things which may otherwise conflict with the motor-head stereotype !!

It is clear that this child will grow up in a very loving environment - many children around the World would clearly be very lucky to be given the chance to grow up in such a family.

This topic is re-hashing old arguments heavily debated in this linked thread below.

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/905172-gay-parents-fight-for-custody-with-surrogate-in-thailand/

Biology is quite simple and so is evolution for that matter. I'm pretty sure nature knows better than "socially developed societies". In the so called "socially developed societies" you now have really brain dead stuff like "none binary flowergenders".

Nature and evolution knows better and socially developed societies are wrong in every sense? Ok my friend first step throw out your computer, make a set of clothes out of leaves and branches then walk over to you neighbor and have a fight to the death over the food in his fridge, oh and kidnap his wife as well and drag her to your cave. Then you can make a baby the natural way! The kid can grow up in the cave and be happy, not being subjected to the horrors of modern life, like the prospect of same sex parents.

One logical theory might be socially developed societies are part of evolution.

Rather pointless to debate with a person who can't differentiate between biology and anthropology.

[JUDAS]

Should never have been created..........

Why?

[Asheron]

I rarely post on TV anymore but reading this thread has got my back up. I consider myself a "family man" and as such I'm delighted with the result of this court case as a child will now be raised by 2 people who are obviously totally devoted to her. Bravo

You are right, but the kid should never have never been put in this situation..

Of having two loving parents willing to fight for it?

Some kids should be so lucky.

Ah... so when a couple seperates and goes to court to get the custody of the kid(s) that same kid(s) should be lucky?

[Asheron]

Is a kid created via the use of Viagra unnatural?

Need biology lessons?

[Jingthing]

Should never have been created..........

Why?

I think there is an honorable POV that opposes all surrogacy for whatever parents in any country. I would respect someone expressing that, but again, this child exists, so that's ACADEMIC.

[SoiBiker]

Is a kid created via the use of Viagra unnatural?

Need biology lessons?

If conception only occurred because of the use of a chemical, how is that natural?

[Kaalle]

Asheron the two are kind of intertwined no?

And raising a kid is more of an anthropological endeavour.

Edited April 27, 2016 by Kaalle

[JUDAS]

Should never have been created..........

Why?

No mum......

If that's your answer in it's entirety then I better contact the few fathers I know who are raising their kids alone and inform them they are not worthy, in your opinion.