'I won't let my sister meet my son because of her views on surrogacy. AITA?'
"AITA? I won't let my sister meet my son because of her views on surrogacy."
When my husband (32m) and I (28m) told our families about our intentions to have a child within the next year, my sister (34f) is the only one who reacted with anything other than support. For our first baby, my husband and I decided on going the surrogacy route. My sister seemingly took this as a personal attack.
She spent the rest of the dinner my parents were hosting essentially ranting about how surrogacy is misogynistic, exploitative, that we're gross for wanting to rent a woman's body. Okay, sure. You can have your thoughts on the process. But it didn't end there.
Every time we gave an update to family and she was in attendance, she would make it a point of reminding us how she felt. Our son was born a little over two months ago. We've been keeping him to ourselves since he was born so his immune system strengthens, but we've been slowly introducing him to more people lately.
My husband's parents came over two weeks ago, and then my parents came last weekend. Yesterday, my sister texted to ask when she could meet the baby and I told her I didn't particularly want someone around him who was so against his entire existence. I said that if she had it her way, my son wouldn't even be here.
She says I'm being unfair, but I just can't imagine her around my child when she was so adamantly disdainful towards us during his conception and throughout the pregnancy. AITAH?
Edit: MY HUSBAND AND I ARE BOTH MEN. It’s in the first line of the post.
The internet did not hold back one bit.
Any-competition-448 wrote:
More info needed: Was your surrogate a friend and/or volunteer with similar wealth / privilege as you? (ie, was she performing a free act of love or was she pushed to surrogacy because of poverty, comes from a country that has been historically exploited by wealthier and more powerful countries, etc?)
OP responded:
We were connected with our surrogate via the agency we went through. And the same can be said for her: she connected with us the same way. It’s a two way street. The comfortability of both parties is considered. Matches are made based on what each party wants.
My husband and I really wanted someone who was open to being in contact with us regularly. She is in a similar tax bracket to us. Our surrogate was a lovely woman who was compensated, yes, but also provided us with this miracle out of love and kindness.
My husband and I are not religious, but we were shown what the best, most pure version of religion can look like through her and her husband. She truly opened our minds and our hearts in ways we never expected, and we’re still friends today.
personal_conflict_49 wrote:
NTA. My friend has been a surrogate and she loves it. She enjoys pregnancy, but didn’t want to have more children. She also loves being able to help couples who were struggling. So your sister can’t speak for all women.
Proof_self9691 wrote:
She’s not against his existence, she’s against the way you went about it and the system that exists as a problem. It’s understandable to voice ethical concerns with a family members action, it’s also understandable to recognize that someone did something you disagree with but that family is family and there’s no point in depriving a child of family bc it didn’t do anything wrong.
writing_mm_romance wrote:
My grandma would say, "you burn a blister, you sit on it"
She should have chosen her words more carefully if she didn't want them to come back and haunt her.
guilty_choice6797 wrote:
NTA. And what is misogynistic is her thinking she can tell other women what to do with their bodies. It’s like “feminists looking down on stay at home moms. Feminism was about women getting to make their own choices.
Urbanhippiestrail responded:
I get where you’re coming from. The idea that it’s a woman’s body and her choice sounds empowering. But the reality behind commercial surrogacy is far more complicated. In most cases, the women who become surrogates aren’t doing it from a place of true agency, they’re doing it because they’re in economically vulnerable situations.
So it’s not exactly a free or empowered choice, it’s often the best option in a bad set of circumstances. That’s not bodily autonomy; that’s survival. Also, once a contract is signed, their lives are heavily controlled. What they eat, how they move, where they live. It’s not empowerment if your body becomes a regulated space for someone else’s benefit.
So yes, on paper it looks like choice. But in practice, it’s a system built on inequality, and that’s why many of us see it as misogynistic. If it’s not something a woman would do without being paid (money, approval, safety, survival, or anything else) , it’s not a real choice. That said, the sister is definitely TA. She didn't need to bash OP for his choices even if she didn't want to be supportive.
Zaula_ray wrote:
NTA. I'd keep her far away from your sweet child. First chance she gets when he's older, she'll probably tell him to his face what she's always felt. She'll probably tell him that he's not really a part of the family. You picked up what she was putting down, and she's getting exactly what she asked for and deserves.
ladypolaris wrote:
The problem with surrogacy is unchecked capitalism, which is also the problem with s#@ work, stay at home parenting, physical labor, etc. Our entire society is built upon the exploitation of people’s labor in various shapes and forms.
There’s a huge range of how demeaning and violating this exploitation is, but it all comes back to the same root source: unchecked greed and treating people like things.
Being a surrogate isn’t inherently exploitative. Being a surrogate out of desperation and lack of other choices is. We don’t know what circumstances OP and his husband’s surrogate was in, so we really can’t judge that. And neither can his sister. NTA, OP.