They could have allowed her to see the baby she gave birth to! That was illegal what they did! Yes I no she was just a surrogate but she had a right to see her baby. When the baby was born the stupid nurse should have handed him over to his birth mother. In another movie about a surrogate mother: She got to keep both babies who she was caring for a couple. Every surrogate has rights to any baby they give birth to.
Are you a mother or are you possibly a troll? Just curious because I don't even know if you've watched the movie. The parents weren't selfish, this was their CHILD. There's nothing I wouldn't do for my child, no matter who carried the baby as my surrogate. The movie you're talking about is irrelevant... And the situation sounds to me like an adoption, not a typical surrogacy that we have today. Let's be serious, she was selfish for getting a nanny? She was a working mother who's providing for her child. Only a mother who stays home or doesn't work for extended periods of time are "good mothers"? You've got to be kidding me. You obviously do not have children, nor should you ever if that's your thought process on how you would handle a situation such as this.
share[deleted]
She wasn't the mother, in any shape, way or form. The baby was both biologically Christi's and legally.
"Tree's don't all grow straight, they grow however makes them happy"-Bob Ross
[deleted]