Pattharamon Janbua  is a surrogate mother who carried twins for an Australian couple. Upon learning that one of the twins had Down syndrome, the couple pressed  Janbua to get an abortion. She refused and the couple chose to abandon that child and take only the healthy baby.
This is a chilling story, but one with a happy ending for the baby. You see, in this case, the surrogate mother chose to keep and raise him, telling  a reporter her respect for the dignity of the human person had no preconditions for earning that respect. Janbua loves the baby unconditionally. And she pointed out that abortion is against her Buddhist religion.
God bless her.
Lucetta Scaraffia, an Italian feminist columnist with the Vatican newspaper L’Osservatore Romano, heard of the case and, according to the Washington Post opined , “We should not be surprised if parents who have ordered a baby and rented a woman’s womb refuse it at birth if it is not healthy and perfect. . . . In fact if a child becomes a product to buy, it is obvious that as with any acquisition it must meet with the buyer’s approval.”
The Post continued,
The strongly worded commentary was written by prominent Catholic feminist and regular contributor Lucetta Scaraffia, who argued the child’s rejection was to be expected in the “explosive mix” of consumerism combined with a “throwaway culture.”
“Now everyone is indignant, or making a show of being indignant,” Scaraffia said. “In reality there is little to be indignant about—if you accept the logic that a child is a product this is the obvious consequence. We should not treat it as an isolated case.”
However, Baby Gammy’s natural parents represent more than the worst of consumerism. They are the poster couple for a seriously ailing attitude toward human dignity that views undesirable babies as a throw-away commodity.
Reproductive science is an all too cooperative ally in this degradation of man. For example, in Great Britain, where three-parent  embryonic children are now approved, there is growing debate about how the government is representing this so-called scientific advance. It is argued that the public is being deceived regarding the “genetic modification” of the embryos in question. After all, the fundamental reason  for a three-parent embryo is genetic purification, or to put it another way, genetic manipulation of the embryonic baby to ensure that no “imperfection” shows up in the final product.
This is the type of weird science, totally divorced from the laws of nature, that caused one feminist to proclaim that within 30 years, according to her sources, the artificial womb  will become culturally acceptable. She opines that this will change the definition of feminism forever. Indeed!
As a matter of fact, this latest scientific process, called ectogenesis , has been described  as “a fight between feminists who don’t want to ‘hand over women’s sacred birthing ability to science’ and scientists who believe it can help mothers avoid the medical dangers of childbirth.”
Reproductive science  has, since that first official in vitro fertilization success, gained in popularity. In addition, it has changed the way couples view the possibility of having children—on their own terms and contrary to God’s plan.
Think about Baby Gammy!
And while it is true that the Catholic Church has been singular in her official proclamations , repeatedly pointing out in Church documents  the reasons why IVF and its progeny are wrong, something is missing. For some strange reason those teachings have rarely found their way into the pulpits, classrooms, and lecture halls where Catholics learn and understand what the Church teaches and why she does not waver. As a consequence, more and more individuals are, I fear, enslaved by all manner of aberrant sexual practices including the right to expect a genetically perfect child, the right to abortion, and the right to birth control.
Where are the voices of truth these days? More and more people are becoming ignorant slaves to their own passions while the shepherds look on!
It is all very frightening and extremely sad indeed.