Gay fathers, Indian mother

Israeli gay couple, Yonatan and Omer Gher, hired a surrogate mother to deliver their child here. Their first-born was conceived with a Mumbai-based surrogate mother. Great. I mean it. Now, let us get to the questions. Here is a part of the report:
India, with its availability of surrogates, easy paperwork and lower costs has earned a reputation for its surrogacy programme, with Anand in Gujarat often being referred to as the ‘surrogacy capital of the world’.

Is this why India needs Narendra Modi, as some half-baked columnists are whooping with joy about? Just this one clinic where the Israeli couple went to has been responsible for 40 such surrogate births since 2005. There is nothing to feel proud of. It is because we are a country of cheap labour, and motherhood has been reduced to just that.

Surrogacy is available only in the US and India, and naturally they chose India because of the cost factor. And to think that so many Indians who don’t have much money and crave children cannot afford this option because of not just money but also bureaucracy.

Another aspect that disturbs me is they have called their first-born, Evyatar. It means “more fathers’’ in Hebrew. Imagine a child growing up with this identification. Does it have to be so obvious? And what about the mother’s role?

Oh, they are planning another baby with her because they want “real siblings”. It’s all about them and theirs. The woman can take the cash and go, and am sure it is a small portion of what the clinic charged.

If this is our selling point, then we must start making people cough up more for it. Motherhood is not some commodity available at discount over the counter. Indians go on and on about Shakti and Durga and Lakshmi.

Here’s our chance to respect the wealth of woman power.


  1. That gives India a new Industry, "Reproductive Process Outsourcing" (RPOs), we have the scale and the support/ technology....

  2. FV:

    Yeh hai Mumbai meri jaan. yahaan sab kuch bikta hai...

    Raj Kapoor to Johnny Walker... they had it right in the B&W era of Hindi cinema. It wasn't called Bollywood then.

    Incidentally, how is this different from the kind of marriages that we have in India, where women is just a child bearer and nothing else? At least, these guys (gays actually) are paying her at least.

    I am getting too cynical, Ma'am.

  3. Who's the baby going to call Mom and whom Dad?

    Or perhaps they'll substitute Mom & Dad for Doggie and Dog.

    I'm sure Israelis and Indians will figure that out between the two.

  4. Baby would call Zeemax mom!
    Hey long time no see. Visit me at my blog...what is in the url.. just visit.


  5. I find the responses very sexist here!


    Why should it become an industry? Is sperm donation an industry?
    - - -

    By your logic then, a career woman is better off than a housewife/homemaker whatever you wish to call her? Only because money is involved in one? The woman as child-bearer in a marriage does have the choice to exercise her rights. Patriarchal society may deny her those, but should she rise in revolt it is possible. My beef against this sort of surrogate motherhood is that it does not take the woman into account at all.
    - - -

    As in almost all cases in life, the one whose sperm results in birth is the dad.

    Indians and Israelis don't have to figure it out. This is not like the LoC thing, is it?

    The Hebrew words for father and mother are Tishrei and Cheshvan...
    - - -

    Zeemax donon ka baap hai...

    So, is that why you invited him to your blog??

  6. The last bit of my comment is not to be taken literally. It is used coloquially to mean no one can mess with him.

  7. It could have been , if there were takers , I guess more sellers than buyers ....commercially not viable ....I havent tried but confident ....

  8. FV:

    You did not get my comments here. Whether it is a career woman or a homemaker, the women has no right over her womb. Come on, that's a fact in our society.

    Obviously, no one can agree with surrogate motherhood as a mercenary approach. What I wanted to say was that the women in conventional Indian society are no better -- the society does not take the women into the account at all?

  9. PS:

    True, but technically and ethically she has the right to object. In a monetary transaction that right is taken away.


Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.