here's an example for you dumb ****s:
-
-
insurgent — 1 year ago(January 21, 2025 08:39 PM)
Whether it gives you happy feelings or not, this is absolutely in line with abortion rights. It would be the risk a couple takes. The government shouldn't meddle just bc the law makes people sad in a random hypothetical scenario that is probably so rare it's statistically insignificant
-
JFC — 1 year ago(January 21, 2025 08:46 PM)
Legally speaking there is a contract in place and there would be damages the surrogate would be liable for.
If it were John's sperm, Jane's egg or both, then the damages would be greater unless explicitly stated in the contract what the remedies were.
Arguing other things isn't going to get you very far until we are just hashing out belief systems and where those systems intersect. -
/. — 1 year ago(February 13, 2025 05:10 AM)
A contract is you giving away your autonomy within the terms spelled out by the contract. If you don't adhere to the agreement, there are damages and remedies, usually spelled out in that contract.
If there was no contract and a remedy is sought, then you find a 3rd party to contract with to provide a judgement. Most people in the U.S. (for example) use the court system because they believe it to be the way to go. This isn't exactly true, but discussing that further goes down a bit of a rabbit hole. -
/.ㅤ — 1 year ago(February 02, 2025 06:42 AM)
So what do you want to do? Do you want to force the surrogate to go through with the pregnancy?
It's a **** situation for John and Jane but the time and effort spent suing someone over their bodily autonomy would be better spent finding a more committed surrogate.
My password is password.
Schrodinger's Cat walks into a bar, and doesn't. 