CHECK THIS OUT! Surrogate mom, Shelly Baker keeps newborn twins!!

[deleted account] ( 48 moms have responded )

This absolutely blows me away......I watched for the second time on Dr. Phil this surrogate, Shelly Baker try to explain why she felt she had the right to keep this other couples children! Although she legally has the right because in Michigan the surrogacy laws on on her side I find this appauling and so does Dr. Phil! Have a look and let's hear what you think???



http://www.drphil.com/shows/show/1397

MOST HELPFUL POSTS

[deleted account]

Just for the record, I'm haven't read through all the comments so if someone has said this already please ignore! I'm absolutely not making excuses but I do want to clarify something.......



The Kehoe's didn't pay her anything for having the babies.......what they want ' back ' is the money they paid to have the procedure done and all the medical costs they covered while Shelley was pregnant! Of course the company won't reimburse them for the procedure so they obviously feel that Shelley and her husband should pay! There was no other fee paid to SHELLEY; no money went directly into her pocket!



I'm just clarifying......I find Shelley disgusting! I couldn't stop yelling at the TV while I was watching it!

Emily - posted on 06/16/2010

1

0

0

This woman Shelly stated that she wanted to go on this show to share her side of the story so people would stop viewing her as a baby stealer. The problem is, she went on the show and stated her case clearly, and she still looks like a monster. I hadn't even heard of this story before I saw this show tonight. Before I even heard the side of the biological parents I knew something was up with this woman. I honestly think that she started to get tired of being pregnant from the surrogacies she's done, or maybe she just felt more of a bond with these babies during her pregnancy than she has in others and it finally started to become hard for her to feel them grow inside of her and then have to give them up. If she has such strict and over the top expectations then why didn't she come right ougt and ask these people if they had any history of mental illness? She just assumes that only perfect people want to have children? Something is wrong here. If she didn't ask the right questions then she can't get mad at them when she finds out that they haven't lived 100% perfect lives. Her whole argument was that she was soley concerned for the sake of the children. Then at the end of the show when Dr. Phil said he could provide her with some professionals who could reallly evaluate the situation to see if the biological parents were fit or not, she simply said no. It was too late because she already loved the babies too much. How selfish is that? Of course you love them! They are babies who have been depending on you for love and support since you took them from their blood parents! Has she even thought about what will happen when they grow up and realize what she did? I know so many people who were abandoned by their parents. Some parents just don't want their children so they run away or put them up for adoption. And still, these children often grow up wanting to meet these people who created them. This is a story of biological parents who REALLY WANT their children but can't have them because some woman who is NOT a doctor said she thought the mother MIGHT be unstable when she had no proof or real reason to assume so. How awful! These children are going to realize what an awful thing she did. If she raises them right and they have any smarts about them, they will ask "hey mom, did you give them a chance? Did you ask a professional to check them out?" No! It's completely disgraceful and selfish what she has done. This poor couple who can't have children on their own will forever have to live with the fact that they were granted an opportunity to have children and that person took it away and stole their babies! This is awful. I was truly pained when I watched this show tonight. As a mother I can tell you I am usually the first person to worry about everything and still I know that what she did was wrong. I do not feel for this woman at all. The system messed up big time on this one.

Isobel - posted on 02/25/2010

9,849

0

282

I also think that the surrogate should be sent in for a battery of tests. She appeared to be quite narcissistic and delusional herself. Those babies are not related to her...she should be held to the same standard as the intended mother.

And no, they did not want an INDEPENDENT Psychiatrist needed to evaluate her... they flat out refused to give the babies back for any reason. "because they have bonded with their family now".

They are kidnappers.

[deleted account]

I think that the surrogate mother has some issues. She said herself that she feels addicted to being a surrogate. She talks about the great relationship she had with her other recipients and about how she would call them at 3:00 in the morning to get her taco bell so they could "be part of the pregnancy" LOL. About how nice they were to her and how well they treated her. Then she talks about how this particular recipient didn't go to all the doctors appointments in the end of the pregnancy, just the ultrasound appointments, and about how she had her whole family in the hospital when the twins were born and had no consideration for how she felt and how they didn't come and talk to her after that it was all about the babies. DUH! Isn't that the point! The only thing she had to say bad about them was about how inconsiderate they were to her feelings. Honestly I think the only thing that the recipients did was not bend over backwards to kiss her ass like a birthing goddess like the other recipients did. If they had I doubt she would of taken them back. Their only basis for taking away the babies was for an issue she had 10 years prior and she's never had a relapse. How hard is it to do a background check on someone? It's pretty simple to get a doctors note saying your mentally and physically fit to take care of kids. My friend runs a day home and she had to get one. I mean if your going to give birth for someone you would think you would take the initiative.
The least they could do is pay them back for the procedure. I mean they kept the kids so why not be responsible for their bills? And if the point was to give a couple who can't have kids children then why did they keep them? They could have given them to a much deserving couple that could of filled any criteria that they wanted.

Sharon - posted on 02/25/2010

11,585

12

1314

Heather - since I would have ASKED about why someone was seeing a psychiatrist before getting pregnant with their child - its a moot point as to what I would do.



The facts are - this didn't matter to her UNTIL she gave birth to a boy. It would have mattered to me before. Does that make sense? Its to late for her to be crying about morals, ethics and claim worry for the children.



I get the sense the reason why she didn't use her eggs was because of her mental illness. She has a great & loving husband who backs her up and supports her despite/inspite of her illness.



That said, I might not descriminate against a woman with schizophrenia in her position as long as the contract says in the event of their deaths or incapcitation I get custody of the child/children or approve of the family member who will be taking custody, and life insurance/disability payments etc. Vastly different.



Are we supposed to deny people with diabetes from having children? They can get psychotic, disabled etc.

If you see this, leave this form field blank.
Powered by RESPECT not THUMPS

48 Comments

View replies by

Sarah - posted on 06/24/2010

555

25

44

This woman disgusts me. She totally took advantage of these people and now has their children.. Makes me sick!
This couple invested a lot of money into those 2 babies, including the IVF treatments, the prenatal care, and all the "gifts" they gave her while she was preggo- sure she didn't get paid, but she wasn't doing poorly either.
And to say she is keeping the twins because she is concerned for their welfare? Since when is she qualified ot make that decision? Didn't they have an awful lot of professionals saying the mother was fit to have these children, including her own psychiatrist? But the surrogate thinks she is more qualified to make a call about mental health than a doctor???
Total BS. The surrogate is taking advantage of a loophole in the law adn the poor couple gets screwed. It must be nice to get 9 months worth of housecleaning, daycare, gas, etc paid for. What a racket.

Carin - posted on 06/24/2010

19

8

6

I have to wonder why the intended couple didn't just adopt in the first place. They used a sperm donor, an egg donor and a surrogate. Seems awfully complicated and filled with legal ambiguity. Seems adoption would have been simpler. And considering how complicated adoption is, that's saying something.

Amber - posted on 06/20/2010

1,909

13

144

I think this story is really sad. The surrogate should have gotten all the proper background information before she signed the contract. But that is a moot point because it's already done. Since she and her husband have chosen to keep the babies, they should pay the money back.

I highly doubt that the intended parents will ever see the money though, which is so sad for them. If they don't have more money saved up they won't be able to try again. Even if a judge orders the surrogate to pay the money back, she can file bankruptcy on it and never pay a dime to the parents.

Our system is so flawed at times :-(

[deleted account]

I agree.....I think what she's doing is morally wrong but she's legally within her rights. IF she's going to keep the children she should at the VERY least repay them the money for the fertility treatments!

Isobel - posted on 06/19/2010

9,849

0

282

and she should repay the intended parents who paid for the fertility treatments

Jess - posted on 06/19/2010

1,806

3

96

This finally aired in Australia the other day and I change my mind.

Neither the intended parents or the surrogate are their biological children, so the intended parents have no legal right to them, which complicates matters.

The surrogate's argument is valid. The intended parents where not open and honest before the pregnancy started and it was only when they went to court to give the babies to the intended parents did the truth come out.

The surrogate had the right to know ALL the facts before she entered into this agreement, they are legally her babies.

Jess - posted on 03/14/2010

1,806

3

96

Ok, so after reading all the other post's and getting some more info, I have removed my first comment (just because it was full of IF's)



I think if Shelly isn't prepared to give this babies to their intended parents, she should cover the cost's of the medical proceedures and pay the other couple damages. Why on earth should anyone else pay your medical expenses ?



The intended parents should do some research and try again in a state that has laws regarding surrogacy that favour them and have a legally binding contract to protect themselves.



My heart is breaking for those intended parents. I can't wait for this episode to air in Australia !

April - posted on 03/14/2010

3,420

16

263

there was a mother in the breastfeeding moms community that had bipolar disorder. she had to go off of her medicine in order to breastfeed and now realizes that she needs her medicine. she was heartbroken to have to stop breastfeeding but she knew that she couldn't be the best mother without the meds. so yes, i think someone with a mental illness can be a good mother and make good decisons for their children

[deleted account]

Just clarifying some points......stating the facts if you will! I believe Dr. Phil is doing a follow up show......I'll let everyone know ahead of time!

[deleted account]

Meghan : without watching the actual show it's hard to get all the details straight.....LOL! Shelley didn't know about the mental condition, which has been under control with medication for 10+ years at the beginning of the pregnancy BUT it was brought to her attention well before the pregnancy was due! There was a home visits and mental health visits and even a note from the Kehoe's doctor in support of them having this baby! Shelley and her husband intially gave the Kehoe's the twins but at some point after the fact went and took them back!

[deleted account]

One detail of this story concerned me when I read it --- the mother has an undisclosed mental condition, so maybe this is why the surrogate wanted the babies back. I'm not saying it's right, and since we don't know what the condition is, it's tough to make an opinion. Since MI doesn't allow contracts, the couple knew there was always this risk. It stinks, but if that's the law, then that's the law. I'm wondering how long a surrogate gets, though. When a child is 7 years old, can a surrogate come back and get the kid? That definitely seems unfair, but at what age does the law draw the line? I presume most surrogate mothers do this out of the kindness of their hearts and have no intention of coming back to get their children. Unfortunately, the stories we often hear are these types where the surrogate does come back. Sad story all around, and I do feel sorry for the couple, since it sounds like they loved these little ones a lot.

Geralyn - posted on 02/25/2010

1,616

35

240

Shelby and Laura, I couldn't agree with you more. Alison, you are mistaken about surrogacy. Michigan laws are NOT the norm, and there are not "so many laws against it." Michigan is behind the times, and the outcome for the intended couple would have been different in many other states.



While I understand that any woman who carries a baby may get attached to the baby, it is NOT her baby. She entered into a contract where she agreed to carry another couple's babies for that couple. Just because of the nature of surrogacy, unless the intended couple and the surrogate agree otherwise, the surrogate has no claim to the baby or babies after the birth. She does not get to say what happens to the baby or babies in the event of death or incapacitation. That would totally contradict the nature of the contract.



In this situation, the surrogate did not have to agree to carry this couple's babies. She should have asked questions and made sure that she was comfortable with this couple. If I undertook a pregnancy to help a couple, I would make sure that I felt the couple was acceptable OR I WOULD NOT HAVE SIGNED THE CONTRACT! I would have waited for another couple that I felt was going to love and nuture and care for the baby. The surrogate in this case knew that the mom had been treated by a psychiatrist - she had a duty to ask the important questions. The time to question the couple was before a dime was spent and before a contract was entered into. Not after the fact.



I was reading that surrogate fees can exceed $20,000 - and of course, with twin, it was probably more than that. That does not include all of the expenses that the couple has to pay.

Heather - posted on 02/25/2010

525

20

18

They felt that an INDEPENDENT Psychiatrist needed to evaluate her...the Dr. who did it was her Dr. for 10 years...of course he would say she was ok. I believe this is what the surrogate mom had trouble with...plus the fact that she felt that these evals should have happened before she did the IVF...so that her mental issues would have been disclosed and she could have had the option to refuse to do the surrogacy. I believe Dr. Phil also felt there should be an independent evaluation done, and offered to pay for it.

Shelby - posted on 02/25/2010

258

13

12

I pity the twins...I pity the fact of the matter that it is two more people added to the world taught to discriminate and be ignorant. So much for progress.



And as far as testing done, What kind of testing can be done, She had doctor's notes, referrals, and a home study... What else is needed for an adoption?

Sharon - posted on 02/25/2010

11,585

12

1314

Ah well, I don't happen to fully agree or fully disagree. So I guess I'm done!

Heather - posted on 02/25/2010

525

20

18

Sharon, its not about HAVING children....its about ADOPTING children....and yes, if a person has any debilitating disease and may not be able to care for the child...they are not usually approved for adoption. You cant keep a woman from getting pregnant...whether she is fit or unfit...but they can control who adopts a child and that is my point...I am sure this is why the couple decided on surrogacy...even though Michigan dosent even recognize surrogacy...I'm willing to bet they could not get approved for adoption. I dont think either side of this is right...I am just saying that if it were me...I would have a problem with handing those babies over without having more testing done to ensure the couple could properly care for the babies...having ONE baby is stressful for a couple who are healthy and dont struggle with mental issues...TWINS are double the stress and responsibility. I honestly can see both sides of this story...I am taking up for the surrogate...I can see her point, and everyone is doing a good job taking the intended parents side.

Heather - posted on 02/25/2010

525

20

18

These babies are as much the surrogates babies as they are the intended couples...if not more since the children are in the surrogates care...they dont carry either set of parents DNA, so legally, the woman who gave birth to them and has been caring for them is the mother...according to Michigan law anyway. She said over and over that she was concerned for the welfare of the children...i just read the transcripts on Dr. Phil's site...there are some shady things on both sides of this story.

Shelby - posted on 02/25/2010

258

13

12

Yeah I personally could never do it...Maybe if it was a sister...That would have to be about it. I have friends, but even then because of differences in opinions, and so many factors, I just have to be honest and say I personally could not do it. On the other hand, I have also been blessed with the ability to have my own children, So I don't know the desperation that it would take to undergo such a drastic situation.

It is very sad that because of an illness she was forced to be left with this as her last hope. When in all honesty a lot of mothers with mental illness work twice as hard as healthy mothers to raise their children. There is a nasty stigma attached to mental illness and to fight through that, It is always left that not only do you have to care for your children on a daily basis, love them teach them, provide for them...Like all other parents...You have to constantly look over your shoulder and PROVE yourself to others. All the while doing extra work to take care of yourself...Its a sick sick world.

Alison - posted on 02/25/2010

2,753

20

466

Haven't seen the show, but she is definitely playing dirty. Surrogacy is just a messy thing to get involved with and this is precisely why there are so many laws against it.

If I were thinking of getting a surrogate mom, I would get one from India, where the women use the opportunity to bring their family out of poverty.

I cannot understand why someone would want to be a surrogate mom if they are not getting paid significantly and are not really close to the intended parents. Especially, knowing that you have to let go of the child you have bonded with in your womb.

Shelby - posted on 02/25/2010

258

13

12

Fact of the matter is, They are NOT her babies to decide what to do with, She was merely a vessel for another couple to become parents, WHICH they have as much right to become as anyone else. She agreed to it, and from the Dr.Phil show, this woman was not concerned for the welfare of these children. She did a very dirty underminded trick to get her boy. To discriminate against a mentally ill person is wrong. Period.

Heather - posted on 02/25/2010

525

20

18

Seriously? If you put yourself in this surrogates shoes, and found all this out after the fact, you would be ok to just hand over these babies...no questions asked? As far as the intended mother being "under control" for the past 10 years...thats great, however, people with PS can be fine for years, and relapse...usually increased stress can trigger a relapse...I would consider taking care of newborn TWINS a big increase in stress! PS is a progressive disease and gets worse and requires increases in medications and constant supervision...its a serious disease...http://www.helpguide.org/mental/schizoph...



Shelby, I dont think it matters much that she hasn't been hospitalized for 10 years for reasons mentioned above. What your trying to say, is that her husband is going to be there...so hes supposed to care for her AND newborn twins...I dont think that is fair for him! Fact is, parents who try to adopt are held to a high standard that natural parents are not held to...they check your background and judge you based on it...to protect the children going into these peoples care. You cant screen a pregnant woman and make sure she is fit to be a parent. I guess I would feel differently about this if they were genetically this couples babies. I mean just because they pay some money dosent mean they should automatically get the babies no questions asked.



Sharon, We all have a past, and if he tries to adopt in the future, your neighbor may not be able to due to any criminal past he may have...thats just the way it works...and it should be this way to protect the child/children being adopted.



I am shocked that people are so upset at this woman for trying to protect the babies that she carried and delivered...and dont hold the intended mother responsible for anything...at least disclosing her mental issues and convictions to this surrogate.



Laura, mental illness does not just go away...its just like any other illness, it can be controlled and maintained for years, but it never goes away, and certainly stress can cause a relapse, even in a well controlled person. So there is no "used to have mental illness"

Sharon - posted on 02/25/2010

11,585

12

1314

Heather - how many teens have been in those shoes these days?

Hell. my uber christian neighbors, church 3 times a week, awana meetings, church cookouts at their house, two decent parents, a nice house, a vehicle for everyone, a daughter in college, and a son who has fucked up.

DUI, fighting, in counseling... his dad was deployed to Iraq/afghanistan. For sure the kid has mental issues. By the surrogates' thinking, he ought to be sterilized now to prevent him from having kids.

Shelby - posted on 02/25/2010

258

13

12

Even if the lady has paranoid schizophrenia and psychotic disorder, She hasn't been hospitalized for at least 10 years. She has had it under control and is under constant supervision, and on proper medication. It stated clearly in the interview that the surrogate knew she was seeing a psychiatrist and never asked why. The fact some mothers suffer from mental illness, even IF they have to be hospitalized does not mean they are bad parents. She was not looking to raise the babies on her own,She has a husband. Because of the state this was done in, there is not much that can be done...But take it a step further and what next? Is ACS, (Child Welfare, Social Services) going to be visiting our local psychiatrist's offices and getting lists and raiding our houses taking away the children because these mothers are unfit?
It comes down to the fact that the surrogate agreed and milked these people for everything...She's a disgusting loathsome person.

Isobel - posted on 02/24/2010

9,849

0

282

The intended mother suffered from mental illness 15-20 years ago...it has long since been under control. Like Dr. Phil said, if we try to take all the children away from people who USED TO suffer from mental illness away, there would be no end to it.

If you got a chance to see the WHOLE show, you would have seen that this woman delighted in "playing the game"...getting women to drive hours in the middle of the night to satisfy her cravings...and delighting in being doted on.

She was offended by the fact that the intended mother was "more interested in the babies' welfare than hers"... if she didn't take care of me...why would she take care of the babies.

I feel really sad for the intended parents. I understand that there is probably nothing the courts can do to give them back those babies (which is so very wrong), I hope, at the very least they get their money back.

Heather - posted on 02/24/2010

525

20

18

Ok, I just read more about this on Dr. Phil.com. I watched this episode (which was a re run) a while ago and forgot alot of details but....the intended mother didnt just have a slight mental illness...she has paranoid schitzophrenia and psychotic disorder...plus has a criminal background of 2 charges of drinking and driving! No wonder they tried surrogacy, no adoption agency would ever give them a child. I actually think the surrogate mom is right in feeling worried for these babies. She was in court, ready to hand over these babies to these people...the judge asked about a criminal record, to which she admitted to having one..PLUS she has SERIOUS mental illnesses. I really dont think the surrogate was wrong.

Heather - posted on 02/24/2010

525

20

18

I believe the intended mother has had some mental problems for years, and did not disclose this to the surrogate until they were in court trying to finalize the adoption. I dont think that mental illness (well controlled) should keep a person from being a parent, however, the surrogate mother should have been made aware of this before she agreed to this for this couple. I cant imagine how hard it would be to carry twins for a couple, for 9 months, and not feel safe handing them over at the end due to these parents hiding the fact that mom is mentally ill. If it was not an issue, why did this couple keep this important bit of info to themselves? Michigan laws say that in the case of surrogacy, the parents have to adopt the child once its born. In actual adoption where surrogacy is not involved, you have to disclose any mental issues and prove that you are fit to care for a child. The perspective mother should have disclosed her mental illness, so that the surrogate could have refused if she wanted to...fact is, they waited until the deed was done...suspicious. I dont think either of them are right...I can just understand how hard it would be to hand over the babies you carried, birthed, and cared for...to people you dont trust.

Geralyn - posted on 02/24/2010

1,616

35

240

It would be interesting if the donor of the egg had the ability to contest this. Usually the egg donor gets information about the intended couple and makes a decision on whether she wants the couple to receive her eggs, right? So because she did not approve of the Bakers as the recipients of her eggs, then they should not get the twins. The donor could get the children back and then adopt them out to the intended couple! Just a thought...

Geralyn - posted on 02/24/2010

1,616

35

240

I do understand that surrogates can't be "paid." However, please do not think for a minute that expenses are limited to the surrogate's medical expenses. They get paid a surrogate fee and "expenses" that are also compensating them for their time, discomfort, etc.... I would estimate that the couple probably paid about $100,000.

Geralyn - posted on 02/24/2010

1,616

35

240

Michigan laws aside, I don't think that the fact that they are donor egg and sperm should affect the outcome -or even the sympathy factor felt for the intended parents. The critical fact is that the egg and sperm were NOT the Bakers' egg and sperm. She agreed to be a vessel for another couple to experience parenthood. What standing could Baker possibly have to raise issues about the intended mom's mental health? its none of her business. Of course she is out of her mind, having been put through this!!!!

[deleted account]

I know I couldn't be a surrogate mother - i'd feel that the child was mine regardless of the egg and sperm being from complete strangers but she knew that when the child was born he/she should be given to the couple.

C. - posted on 02/24/2010

4,125

35

238

Ok miss know-it-all :) (By the way, I thought you didn't want me to refer to any of your posts- so why are you referring to mine?) But in MOST surrogate situations, the eggs come from the woman wanting a baby and the sperm comes from her partner/husband. I must have missed the part where it said the eggs and sperm came from a donor. But the fact of the matter is, these babies were meant for ONE family and this lady stole them. Maybe she just wanted to become a surrogate for the money, who knows, but either way SHE was in the wrong. She knew what she would have to do when she delivered the babies, she still wanted to go along with it, she should have to give them back to the intended parents, bottom line.

Shelby - posted on 02/24/2010

258

13

12

The egg and sperm both came from a donor...The intended parents paid for the egg,sperm and IVF, along with all Medical expenses. So in all actuality they are only God knows who's "biological" children...

C. - posted on 02/24/2010

4,125

35

238

That is just disgusting.. I cannot believe that someone would do something as despicable as that.. These babies were from the other woman's eggs!!! Does the surrogate NOT know how surrogacy works? The woman gets her eggs taken out and the surrogate gets those SAME eggs put in and they artificially inseminate the eggs with the man's sperm.. Good Lord. These babies were never hers!!!! You would think that by law she would have to give them up b/c her DNA is nowhere in those babies. This is just so disgusting! It makes me want to slap some sense into her! Oh my God! What would screw somebody up so bad to make them think that just b/c they carried the babies (usually for someone that CANNOT carry a baby) that they are hers.. UGH!!!!!!!!!!!! This really pisses me off! If this happens to my sister (she just recently found out she is going through premature menopause at 26 years old and she would liked to have tried for a girl b/c she has 3 boys. Anyway, the doctors did an ultrasound and she has eggs left as of right now), I would go off the deep end! I mean, how sick can someone possibly be???

Shelby - posted on 02/24/2010

258

13

12

While I agree that I personally couldn't carry a child for 9 months then give it up, She volunteered to do it, She has done it once already, and knew exactly what to expect...So in all honesty that argument doesn't even work with her.

I didn't watch the show on television, and couldn't get any of the segments to load on my computer, so I know only what they posted written wise...

Did she receive any "personal" monetary compensation for this? I know they paid for all medical costs, and IVF, and preparatory costs, but just to say this is for doing it...Did she receive anything?



If so, then its pretty clear why she did it.



And surrogacy laws are usually very cut/clear in most states from what I understand. Based on the individual circumstances such as whose egg? whose sperm? And if it is an agreed upon arrangement, then should have been no questions asked and the child sent home with the "rightful" parents, However if this state does not recognize surrogacy I couldn't see even attempting it, as it could lead to the heartache that we are seeing now.

Keisha - posted on 02/24/2010

260

19

22

I didnt watch the episode but honestly will have to disagree... well kind of. I think it would be really really hard to give up a child (in this case 2!) after carrying them for 9 months. But then again I definitely dont agree with them having to pay all that money for nothing... I guess what Im saying is if you get a surrogate mother you should know that there is a slight possibility that that will happen. I think those people should get their money back for sure you cant really force someone to give up their child... wait its not even hers DNA wise though... Im so confused lol

Charlene - posted on 02/24/2010

631

29

25

I can't watch the video either and I can't watch Dr. Phil at the moment! :( Gah!! Curse you Vancouver Olympics!! (Not really though)



What a terrible thing to do to someone. She basically stole these children from this couple and is trying to justify it by saying that the other woman has a mental disorder? I think SHE is the one with the mental disorder. How could she do that to someone? And then she kicked them while they were down and refused to reimburse the costs? Disgusting.

Shelby - posted on 02/24/2010

258

13

12

I fully believe that in some civil court, some judge will award the Kehoes their money back...I just can't hardly see how any judge would just outright think it would be right for any family to pay for IVF, and all the costs of pregnancy and preparing for twin babies for ANOTHER couple for the hell of it...I mean seriously, If a woman can spill coffee on her coochie and sue McD's like she didn't know the shit was hot...Whats the chance that they can't at least get their money back.

However, it will never fully compensate them for what they have gone through. Words can not express my deep hatred for this wretched deplorable bitch...My stomach flips at the thought of it. I pray for this family and hope that they can carry on and find happiness. I seriously don't know how Dr. Phil does his job. I really could not sit there across from human trash like that and not bust her right in the face....That man is a rock.

Nicole - posted on 02/24/2010

1,117

27

47

I am disgusted by her supposed reason to keep these babies! Agreeing with Dr. Phil, if we start taking babies from people because they have a psychological disorder, we would be taking kids forever more!

I know that she is probably caring for those babies very well, but they were not intended to be cared for by her!!!

The least they could do is give the money back to the Kehoe's!!! She won't even do that! How crappy is that??? She won't even return their money so they can try again with another woman who will actually give them their babies! I think Mrs. Baker is actually the one with the mental disorder to somehow think this is okay!

Christine - posted on 02/24/2010

32

15

4

It was like this woman decided to be an issuer of a baby license. 'Oh, I see you have had some emotional issues in your past, hmmm, I'm so sorry, I don't think I can allow you to take these two babies that I have promised to carry for you. I feel with my 'vast' knowledge of all things that you would not be a fit mother'. I do feel that the surrogate should repay the costs that were paid by the adoptive parents. This woman would never have gotten pregnant with the twins had the MI couple not paid for the procedures and when they didn't get what they paid for, the money should have been returned. I understand the bond built when you carry a baby but this so isn't a case of 'I just can't let them go, they're a part of me'. Selfish, devious couple.

Sharon - posted on 02/24/2010

11,585

12

1314

I can't watch it. But after reading through the replies I'm nauseated. What a wretched bitch.

Granted I don't know the surrogacy laws for every state but for damn sure I would make sure I knew them before going into a deal that culminates in a human life.

There must be tons of surrogacy websites online. Hell there are ferret adoption websites online, there must be a few good surrogacy websites online with a sidebar that says "michigan does not support/recognise surrogacy" etc. They didn't go about this in a very intelligent way but she is just a whore. The cool thing is now the expenses are on her. ugh sorry I could feel bile rising in my throat and just gotta drop this topic

[deleted account]

Apparently in Michigan they don't recognize any surrogacy arrangements and I don't think the couple knew that.......both parties should have done more research beforehand! Or used a surrogacy agency? I just can't shake the feeling that the surrogate, Shelly and her husband are just using this to keep thse twins.......I'm extremely sad and very disgusted! The only thing that gives me a little comfort but doesn't make it ok is that these twins are not the ' intended couples ' biological children.......they used a sperm and an egg donor and used IVF to implant them into the surrogate!



Geralyn: you should try and watch the whole episode if you can; you probably didn't get the whole picture from the link! Although the intended couple paid for the sperm and egg donor and the IVF procedure they did NOT pay the surrogate other than her exspenses! Don't get me wrong I still find it utterly implorable!



Erin: Because these are not the biological children of either couple do you think that if Shelly would AT LEAST pay back the other couple for the procedure etc. that it would make it ' less wrong '? I think it would make it a little better, right? Then at least they could try again??

Geralyn - posted on 02/23/2010

1,616

35

240

This is wrong on so many levels. I did not see the show. I'll have to watch it. The couple must be devastated, I cannot imagine what they are going through. And paying for surrogacy is incredibly expensive, I am sure that they have limited funds and are depleted emotionally to be able to try again. How could the laws in Michigan favor the surrogate? Very sad....

Erin - posted on 02/23/2010

1,278

0

139

OMG.......I was disgusted at today's show!!!! I wanted to reach through the screen and shake her.



The bad thing was even after Dr. Phil said he would make resources available for a doctor to come in and evaluate the other couple, she still said she wouldn't give them up!!!



After she found out that one of the twins was a boy, she wanted them. I think she planned not to give them up. And she knew because of the laws that she could legally.



The whole thing makes me sick!!!

If you see this, leave this form field blank.
Powered by RESPECT not THUMPS

Join Circle of Moms

Sign up for Circle of Moms and be a part of this community! Membership is just one click away.

Join Circle of Moms