Personal Response

“The Akanksha clinic is at the forefront of India’s booming trade in so-called reproductive tourism — foreigners coming to the country for infertility treatments such as in vitro fertilization. The clinic’s main draw, however, is its success using local women to have foreigners’ babies. Surrogacy costs about $12,000 in India, including all medical expenses and the surrogate’s fee. In the U.S., the same procedure can cost up to $70,000.”

There are many congenital diseases known to affect fertility and make women unable to get pregnant. Throughout the years, developments in medicine and genetics have helped these women to have a child. Nowadays, it is possible for people to “rent” a uterus so that the surrogate mother gets an in vitro fertilization and carries the baby for another woman during gestation. Once the time has passed, the surrogate mother gives the baby to the “real mother”. These techniques are also used for women who are too busy to have a child, so that they can have one without being pregnant.

In this text, something that might be considered as a problem for many people is presented. Women in need of money "rent their wombs" so that other women, who are unable to get pregnant because of the problems mentioned before, can have a child. The main focus of the fragment is that these procedures are six times cheaper in India than in the United States, which makes people do the "reproductive tourism". According to many people, this might be a problem because of unregulated procedures, possible exploitation of surrogates or surrogates not really taking care of their selves during pregnancy.

I think this is a good alternative for women to have a child, because of the price and in the end it is a mutual benefit both for the mother and for the surrogate, and it depends on each one of us to consider this possibility as a good one or not. I think if someone is able to pay and wants to take this option, then she's able to do so with complete freedom.