Judge the Talk of the Courthouse : Surrogate Says Childbirth Is Too Great a Bond

Surrogate mother Anna L. Johnson said Monday that the public has unfairly condemned her for the most natural of all instincts: a mother’s deep bond to her child.

Johnson, who is fighting for shared custody of the baby boy she bore Wednesday for an infertile couple, said she has suffered widespread criticism for backing out of the $10,000 surrogate contract she signed. But she said the connection between mother and child is more important than any promise she made about giving up the child to his genetic parents.

“If I’m not allowed to change my mind, you might as well take the rest of my rights away too,” Johnson said.

“Your feelings always change during pregnancy. That one statement I made one time, you can’t really go by that. My feelings are constantly changing. I have a right to change my mind.

“But now people view me as a person not good to her word, or think that I’m just seeking publicity, that I should just give the baby and not argue about it. But how can you detach yourself from the feelings of being a mother?”

Because of the deeply emotional nature of childbirth, Johnson said the surrogate arrangement ought to be treated like adoption, in which a birth mother has a certain period of time to decide if she will give up her child. She said it is “not fair” that surrogate mothers do not have that option.

The newborn is currently living with Mark and Crispina Calvert, the infertile couple who hired Johnson to bear a child conceived in a laboratory from their sperm and egg. Johnson visits the baby boy daily, but further court proceedings will determine if that arrangement will last.

Johnson, who calls the baby Matthew, wants a shared parenting arrangement. She said she wants to be a permanent part of the boy’s life.

“He will always be my son, no matter what,” she said. “He knows my voice. He latches onto me when I’m breast feeding as though we had never been separated. He still knows who his mother is.”

Johnson, 29, rejected allegations that she chose to fight for her child in order to gain publicity or more money. She said she developed an inextricable bond to the child when he was in her womb. Giving birth to him gives her parental rights, she said, and added that she will not give them up, even for the sake of shortening what could be a prolonged court fight.

“It’s still a battle between the Calverts and myself,” she said. “It’s like having a rag doll in the middle and pulling. We both love the child so much that neither side wants to give in.

“But how can I give up? I love my son and will fight for him until there’s nothing left in my body.”

When asked if she feels that the most important thing is to create a peaceful environment for the child, Johnson responded: “Isn’t it important for the child to know his mother?”

She lamented having gotten involved in the surrogate arrangement and said she would advise others not to do so.

“Too many people get hurt in the long run, and the one most hurt is the baby,” Johnson said. “When he’s older, it will be hard to explain to him why he has three parents.”

Johnson said surrogate contracts have too much potential to go wrong. Looking back, Johnson believes that both she and the Calverts, who call the child Christopher Michael, were naive and put too much trust in each other.

“I have become more cautious now, about everything,” Johnson said. “About people, about my environment. I was too trusting to begin with. I think on both sides we were.”

Now, when she visits the baby, it’s “a little uneasy being in the same house, but we make the most of it,” Johnson said.

She said she can tell the baby gets “stressed out” by the arrangement, and is confused by the three-parent feeding schedule.

But she still feels that spending time with him is the best thing for the child.

“Even if we (surrogate mothers) are carrying donated sperm and egg, we are still the mothers,” she said. “The child comes out of our bodies. That makes it ours. We are connected forever to that child.”