It sounds like you've been given the assignment "Be an unreasonable, uncaring feminist" honestly. It is really hard to argue for exploitation where there is consent, so you might have to skirt it, or submit to acting like a paranoid nut. I'm kind of annoyed by it, as a reasonable feminist.

You could try talking about adoption. A couple using a surrogate is going a long way to create a baby, when adopting one is so much of a more caring, selfless act. A society that accepts surrogate mothers devalues the concept of adoption being the go-to place for infertile couples, leaving many kids in the system.

You could also go for the idea that it perpetuates the idea that women should be pregnant. Even if she doesn't want a family, she gets pregnant for a couple that can't. I dunno, that's about as close I can get. Good luck.

I would suggest researching surrogacy via women from third world countries and exploring the parallels between surrogacy and the sex trade (both involve "renting out" the female body).

i agree with happyhappygirl, and to continue, i recently did a similar topic in my gender politics class, and we discussed surrogacy.

3rd world women are often 'hired' and exploited by wealthy white couples to bear their children because they have little to no other choice to be able to obtain money to live. They are often not afforded proper care, or proper respect for their bodies, and the rights of the biological parents are of priority instead of the woman who is actually carrying the child.

also, as more of a future repurcussion. the idea of surrogacy could become a world in which women's bodies are no longer independent from society but become recepticals for populating the world. kind of a like a 'brave new world' scenario.

I haven't done much research regarding surrogacy but from a law class that I was in last year you might want to look into the class disparity between people who pay women as surrogates.

Also, there is a practise of "outsourcing" surrogacy to women in other countries such as India that you might want to look into.

I suppose one of the questions you'll want to think about is if you consider the purchase (or renting) of women's bodies as exploitive and build from there. Because this is part of the issue surrounding the exploitation of women who are surrogates.

My issue here wouldn't be the surrogacy so much as the fact that there are so many kids who need adopting.

But without any actual knowledge on the subject, I see a potentially huge problem with this. Pregnancy is a huge commitment of a woman's time, physical health (especially in third world countries where childbirth is still very risky), and emotions. If a woman is pressured by dire financial circumstances and lack of opportunities to go through this process on behalf of strangers, and probably have no relationship to the child after, that seems pretty cruel even if no direct coercion is involved. If it's for financial survival, the woman might spend several years of her life bearing children that she'll then lose forever.

Assuming for the moment that potential surrogate mothers are people, and therefore capable of acting in their own interests, one can assume that any non-fraudulent arrangement they get into must be their best option, as they see it, or else they would do something else instead.

Arguments relating to whether or not it is tolerable that people should exist for whom this is the best option are besides the point, as the solution to that would be unrelated to surrogacy itself. Treating a symptom, by for instance outlawing the use of foreign surrogates, necessarily makes people worse off by denying them their best choice without actually changing the situation which made it so in the first place. There are many parallels with sweatshop labor, as when American companies bow to pressure to close sweatshops, forcing former employees into prostitution, crime, and starvation.

Sort of sounds from the debate title that SOMEONE doesnt think we feminists are capable of allowing people to make their own decisions. I agree with earlier posts, its hard to exploit someone who is informed, willing and, more than that, happy to do something.

If you want to make the argument that it is exploitative, it will probably help to look at the population that is doing most of the surrogacy work. If surrogacy is truly a choice and done simply out of kindness or belief that it's an important cause, then why does the burden invariably fall on lower class women of color? You could find the statistics and make the argument that way. And then emphasize the medical risks and impact on women's bodies. It's not that these women have no choice or are necessarily being coerced, but their social and economic position is being exploited (taken advantage of) for generally white upper class couples who can afford the procedures.

You could look into the way they are treated when they disagree with the adopting parents about medical care or their diet while pregnant. How are they treated when giving birth? Is she treated differently when she donates her egg as well as her womb? Is that adoption or is that surrogacy? How are her feelings addressed during the pregnancy, birthing and after? Is she allowed to have feeling of sadness and loss? How is she talked about during the process? For contrast look at how a surrogate mother is viewed when she wants to keep the baby or have visitation. Remember what Men's Rights say about a man's right to a womans body and then contrast that to how the surrogate is talked about.

Yeah, stick to discussing third world mothers, not ones here. Women here have other choices and are doing it because they like being pregnant and want to help people while still being able to be stay-at-home moms. Most of them are military wives who want to help contribute to their family. They tend to be older women, with several children previously, who know how they will respond to pregnancy Plus, the law here quite clearly gives the surrogate control over her body until she gives birth-- she agrees to a contract to not smoke or drink and to see a doctor, but it's not like if she develops a severe medical condition the law will tell her she can't abort or she won't still be reimbursed for her time up until then. Indeed, in some states they have problems with women going back on their contracts and not relinquishing the child to it's biological parents, and the state ALWAYS sides with the surrogate unless the law states otherwise. They are well informed going into it and most of them seem to just genuinely want to help people and enjoy the feeling of pregnancy and birth. It's unlikely to turn into an overvaluation of the woman's uterus in this country, the biological parents have almost no say except with what is outlined in the contract that the woman consented to.

This is s stupid assignment, giving you random roles... Ask your teacher if you can broaden it. Talk about third-world women as surrogates, but I think a better related subject is egg donation, which targets young, poor women and is painful, dangerous, and they don't tend to tell the women what they are really getting into.

I think you should be able to win the debate even if you discuss women in America, as well.

Do some research that asks questions like:

1. Do wealthy women ever become surrogate mothers?

2. What are the reasons women give for becoming surrogates? (I'm guessing it would be a combination of really needing the cash, plus wanting to help others)

3. Look up the wage gap. (I think it's 77c, 67c, 55c for whites, blacks, latinas respectively) Find out the demographics of surrogates. Any correlations? Brianna G didn't cite any studies about the fact that "most of them are military wives ... who are doing it because they like being pregnant" Is simply 'liking stay-at-home motherhood and pregnancy' really the _only_ factor here? Or are there larger forces at play?

4. Also, if the military wife thing turns out to be true, what sort of political climate were these women raised in? Do they tend to be religious, socially conservative? Anti-feminist? Or is there some undercurrent of uber-liberal military wives that I've never heard of? (the one surrogate I know was indeed a military wife, but only years after she was a surrogate.) Does the fact that a woman is raised in a family that tells her that her primary role as woman is that of baby-machine and caregiver?

5. Define 'coercion by poverty' and 'freely chosen' - does poverty make a choice any less free?

6. Bring up counterarguments - for example, that men donate sperm. - then use your powers of logic to form a counter argument to your counterargument - you could briefly include egg donation.

Remember - it's a debate. You're not trying to find the Truth, necessarily. You're trying to win an argument. - although you may find the Truth in your search for a great argument, that's not the purpose of the assignment.
It's not a stupid assignment. Debating skills and logic are a necessity if you're going to have a philosophy.
I think you could potentially put forth a really good argument. At the end of the class, you might be able to state your real opinion. Being able to argue a point you don't believe in is a skill and is incredibly useful when you want to defend the points you actually do believe in.

Here is a link to a newsweek article that highlighted the military wife angle. I belieive it said that there were not good stats on who is doing this, so I don't know that you can cite anything on that.
http://www.newsweek.com/id/129594

Here is the part that I always struggle with. There is work that you choose because you love it, and that is clearly not exploitation. But there are lots of jobs that people take simply because they need money. Janitors, ice road truck drivers, fast food cook, bikini waxer, bank tellers, coal miners... no matter what the job, lots of people hate their work (those were just examples to provide variety, not editorializing on the quality of those jobs), are subject to humiliating experiences, even danger, but they have chosen it because it pays them the most, offers health insurance, is the only thing their education level qualified them for, whatever. At what point does the work become exploitation?

This is a question with absolutely no snark. I truly wonder about this.

A couple people asked me about my data.

These are the major studies I could find and their results:

"Typically the women were in their late twenties, most often married, and having an average of two children, raised int he Christian Protestant faith, and having two years of postsecondary education" Source

"The women had a mean age of 28 years and a mean of 2.0 children. The mean number of years of formal education was 13. A ratio of five to one of the women were anglo. Of the sample, four to one were currently married and three to one had full-time employment... Enjoyment of the pregnant state and the desire to be pregnant again were cited by the vast majority of surrogate mothers. These women uniformly described their previous pregnancies as relatively easy. Being pregnant seemed to provide an opportunity to feel special and to feel a sense of wholeness. They also felt empathy for childless couples, an empathy increased by prior contact with an infertile couple's pain and by the importance of children in their own lives. A third motivation was the desire to do something remarkable with their lives and make a unique contribution. Many perceived being a surrogate as providing a sense of accomplishment. Financial gain was also cited but consistently was not the primary motivating factor." Source

"The mean age of the entire group was 26. Fifty percent were married, and 26% were single. Seventy-five percent were mothers... As a group, they were predominantly white and either Catholic or Protestant... The average educational level was 13.3 years. Fifty percent had one or more years of college. Approximately 71% were employed (at least part-time), and 20% were either teachers or nurses. Their mean income level was above $24,000 per year. Twenty-five percent had combined family incomes above $35,000 per year. [This includes women judged to be financially desperate.] On average, applicants had been interested in being a surrogate for 1 1/2 years. Seventy-five percent wished to meet the couple... The "average" surrogate emerges as a white mother with a fair amount of education and income. As a group, they cannot be described as destitute or living in poverty, and do not need the fee being paid them for basic survival. On average, they do not report being under serious financial pressure." Source

This is also an article discussing the sharp increase recently in military wives serving as surrogates: Military Wives Cashing In As Surrogate Mothers

In the US and other developed nations, surrogates are usually not truly impoverished, as they would most likely not meet the health requirements and would not have health insurance. None of this is to say this is also true for surrogates in third-world nations, of course, but a surrogate in a developed nation is not being taken advantage of, and I'm sure she would be horribly insulted that you would take her generous act in that way. They are doing this for self-actualization, not for cash.

I just wanted to THANK everyone for their Comments. Your comments were VERY useful. :-D