Recently, Christopher White wrote a commentary  on the ethical problems associated with “surrogate parenthood for money.” He argued that paying for surrogate parenting is actually a form of human trafficking. His position is an interesting one, particularly because he presents his perspective in the context of many surrogate mothers who have later regretted their decision to carry someone else’s child.
According to one agency specializing in surrogacy, the cost can average between $80,000 and $120,000. A second agency, ConceiveAbilities , lists a base fee of $30,000 “paid monthly  from the second heartbeat through delivery” to the surrogate. According to White, “Most surrogate agencies require their surrogates to have already given birth in order to prove they can carry children to term, and the profile of a typical surrogate is a stay-at-home mom or part-time worker looking to contribute to her family’s income, which is usually under $60,000 a year.”
Recently, those concerned about the surrogate mother and her plight released the film entitled Breeders: A Subclass of Women?  The film tells the story of women who chose to be surrogate mothers because they needed the money and felt compassion toward those who could not have children on their own. This is altruism of a type that clearly causes pain and suffering when these mothers realize that the child they have carried for nine months is never going to be a part of their lives again.
As tragic as this might be, it is but one of the results of the reproductive technologies of our day run amuck.
It must also be pointed out that surrogacy has another entirely different set of problems that involves the LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender) community and the way our country is diverging from the traditional view of marriage. Think for a moment about the following examples of why the entire reproductive technology industry is nothing short of a godless attempt to make man in one’s own image without God, without common sense, without moral guidance.
Circle Surrogacy , one of the leading surrogate agencies in the nation, specializes in homosexual couples  and their needs. In the article  cited above, Christopher White mentioned Circle Surrogacy without noting its specialty. Clearly White did not think he needed to touch on the homosexual parenting aspect.
The American Fertility Association addresses the idea of “LGBT family building” saying ,
Everyone deserves to have the family of their dreams and our comprehensive library of articles, fact sheets, handbooks and videos on LGBT family building is a great place to start. On this site you will find information about medical and legal issues facing LGBT . . . individuals and couples when parenthood is the goal. You will also find a directory of LGBT-friendly providers that includes doctors, lawyers, sperm banks, adoption agencies, and egg donor/surrogacy agencies.
Even print media has joined in this new way of thinking about families. For instance, Amazon features children’s books telling stories about homosexual couples as parents. These books are designed to brainwash children by encouraging them to see nothing wrong with the topic of a child having two mommies or two daddies. Titles such as Why I’m So Special: A Book about Surrogacy with Two Daddies  and The New Goldilocks and the Three Bears: Mama Bear, Mommy Bear, and Baby Bear  are just two of the books in a growing number available for children.
Furthermore, the website  “Men Having Babies” panders to this “new normal” concept in many ways and without apology—especially not to the surrogate mother.
When we learn about these new movements in our land and around the world, we have a much better idea of why it is that the Catholic Church was so wise in its fundamental teaching  about the sinfulness of in vitro fertilization and surrogate parenthood.
Pope Benedict warned  against “the lure of the technology of artificial insemination” in which “scientism and the logic of profit seem to dominate the field of infertility and human procreation, to the point of limiting many other areas of research.”
Such technology denigrates God’s design and very frequently makes false promises to those who suffer because of infertility while never mentioning the perverted uses to which the technology is being put today.
Isn’t it long past time to proclaim that God’s plan never causes the kind of suffering and anguish man brings on himself when he attempts to ignore God? Some things will never be normal, but they can be—and are—exceedingly wrong.