Surrogate Court Ruling

In response to “Surrogate Has No Rights to Child, Court Says,” May 21:

Outrageous! The recent majority opinion of the California Supreme Court in the Anna Johnson surrogate mother case is outrageous!

That a contract and the paying of money are more important than any intrinsic, unalienable right of a human person were the essence of the slavery laws in the slave states 150 years ago!

Do the men of the California Supreme Court see themselves as setting a legal precedent for the revival of chattel slavery? How can they be so blind! Three cheers for Justice Joyce Kennard, the only woman and the lone dissenter.

Let us hope the U.S. Supreme Court will take a more humane view of Anna Johnson’s right to her own baby, simply because she is its mother! Women are not merely baby-breeding factories, human assembly lines with “Brave New World” overtones.

MARVIS HUGHES

Los Angeles

*

Anna Johnson is neither more nor less than a baby-sitter. As such, she should be suitably paid. Nine months, or 273.75 days at 24 hours per day equals 6,570 hours. At the minimum wage of $4.35, she deserves $28,579.50 (fully taxable) plus any out-of-pocket expenses. So, on that basis, I consider her $10,000 fee not sufficient.

So Johnson claims she “bonded” with the baby. I accept that. However, millions of other baby-sitters, au pairs, housekeepers and governesses have developed affection, even love for their wards after long periods of time, some working 20 years or more. Those people don’t claim parental rights. Her being a biological host for Mark and Crispina Calvert’s child is merely the high-tech next logical step beyond the old-fashioned wet nurse.

The baby is, was, and always will be the natural child of the Calverts; and I salute the decision of the California Supreme Court.

DAVID M. SILVERMAN

Gardena