Florida - Birth Battle: Couple Says Surrogate Mom Won't Give Up...

If the law states she can change her mind, then she has a full right to do that. The IP's should have made sure the contract was signed before any money went the other way. It the contract wasn't signed, then no money should have been sent and if they sent it anyway. Their fault!! If she refused to sign the contract, no inseminations should have taken place and no money should have exchanged hands. And they should have found someone else. While I don't place 100% blame on them, they screwed up BIG TIME!!! I side with the Surrogate Mom and I want her to know that I am on her side.

Your family will be in my prayers. Have faith that God will resolve this traumatic, and heartbreaking experience for you...but he will only do so in his time. Also, if this lady is trying to use your child as a bargaining tool rest assured that on the Great Judgement Day every knee shall bow and every tongue confess. She will have to answer to God for what she is doing. Keep your faith in God and your love for your child in your heart. As a mother of two very precious teenagers who is now married to a wonderful man who has no biological children of his own (and I am unable to have more children) my heart goes out to you. Fears of something similar happening to us is one of the main factors we have decided not to try surrogacy ourselves.

Wow...

What a low down thing to do to a couple. If the mother had a change of heart and decided she wanted to keep the baby I cant fault her on that, but she should have said something.

Then to try and go for child support after she accepted the contract by cashing the deposit money? That is just unreal.

I hope these people either win custody of the child or they don't have to pay damages (child support) on the child and can find another surrogate that is trustworthy.

Sad as it is and it puts surrogacy in a bad light. It sounds as if they didnt bother to get to know this woman before hand. Do a background check on her as you should on ALL parties and went way to fast. Who would not check to see if she sighed the paperwork?? Thats crazy. AND your supposed to turn the contract in to your attorney after its signed. Seems they didnt do that either or didnt have a attorney in the first place which they should have. All this could have been avoided. I do feel sorry for them, but they should have did their part in the beginning.

Proud surro mom to 3 wrote:

Sad as it is and it puts surrogacy in a bad light. It sounds as if they didnt bother to get to know this woman before hand. Do a background check on her as you should on ALL parties and went way to fast. Who would not check to see if she sighed the paperwork?? Thats crazy. AND your supposed to turn the contract in to your attorney after its signed. Seems they didnt do that either or didnt have a attorney in the first place which they should have. All this could have been avoided. I do feel sorry for them, but they should have did their part in the beginning.

Yes they should have.

i think its her right to keep the baby and its her choice they should have checked the contract! and everybody has a right to change there mind!
she is the biological mom afterall

I side with the real mother (the biological mother) she has a right to change her mind about giving up the baby. The Lamitinas did a grave error by not checking to see if the potenial surrogate signed the contract. Regardless, if she signed a contract or not by state law she has the right to reconsider because she used her egg and the sperm from Tom Lamitina. If the Lamitinas had used the egg from Gwyn Lamitina and the sprem from Tom Lamitina and the woman just carried the baby then they would have a better case. But, I believe that they will not get get this child. Tom Laitina may get visitation rights, but not his child full time and they may even restrict his rights because of the chance he may run off with the baby or barr the mother from the child. Very sticky mess.

This was not an adoption plan. This was a surrogate contract. She went into the contract, received money, and allowed herself to go through medical testing and insemination. She was fully aware of what she was doing. She is one of many who have, over the years, set up and taken advantage of couples that have difficulty having children. She is ethically and morally wrong even if the law states she may be right.

I'm sure that she will teach her children how to be great con artists.

KAE St Louis MO wrote:

I side with the real mother (the biological mother) she has a right to change her mind about giving up the baby. The Lamitinas did a grave error by not checking to see if the potenial surrogate signed the contract. Regardless, if she signed a contract or not by state law she has the right to reconsider because she used her egg and the sperm from Tom Lamitina. If the Lamitinas had used the egg from Gwyn Lamitina and the sprem from Tom Lamitina and the woman just carried the baby then they would have a better case. But, I believe that they will not get get this child. Tom Laitina may get visitation rights, but not his child full time and they may even restrict his rights because of the chance he may run off with the baby or barr the mother from the child. Very sticky mess.

I am a biological mother and an adoptive mother. I am a 'real' mother to all of my children. My children by adoption, are not 'unreal' children. My children by adoption are not 'second class' family members. My children by adoption are not 'pretend' family members. They are real. I am real. My family is real. You insult all families that are not 'biological'.

Lamitina Couple - Victims of Embryonic Hostaging?

This evening on the popular show, The O’Reilly Factor, Coral Springs lawyer Scott Salomon was asked to appear as a guest to discuss his latest case, "Eckerd vs. Lamitina" which has been represented on all of the major networks. Salomon is representing Tom Lamitina in Orlando, who entered into an agreement with a Jacksonville woman that was going to be a gestational surrogate for his child. When the child was born, she refused to give the father custody of the child and is now suing him for child support.
The father is now suing for custody of the child and to have the mother held liable for fraudulent inducement and other related damages. Above all else, the father wants custody of his daughter and for the birth mother to live up to her covenants. Additionally, when the child was born she was given the last name of the mother’s former husband and the father was completely left out.
As a mother and a parent, I am genuinely praying that this woman is brought to justice and that baby Emma is returned to her intended parents, the Lamitina's.
We all need to practice objectivity in this case for the sake of baby Emma, and honestly ask ourselves to look at the facts. The facts clearly show that baby Emma was used to extort money from an innocent and heart-broken couple, and innocence is not the way to describe a woman who uses unborn children, human life, for her own personal gain, through the practices of deceit and trickery. Emma deserves better parenting and the Lamitina's are those parents.
As responsible parents, it is our human obligation to consider Emma's rights and to help shape our children’s' future by supporting the Lamitina’s in this case so that Emma, and others like her, can have the chance to learn the values of honesty, integrity and genuine unconditional love.
The added-plus to a fair result (Lamitina's get their baby!) is that Eckerd will be held accountable for her actions in embryonic hostaging.
-A Mother With Her Eyes Wide Open

KAE St Louis MO wrote:

I side with the real mother (the biological mother) she has a right to change her mind about giving up the baby. The Lamitinas did a grave error by not checking to see if the potenial surrogate signed the contract. Regardless, if she signed a contract or not by state law she has the right to reconsider because she used her egg and the sperm from Tom Lamitina. If the Lamitinas had used the egg from Gwyn Lamitina and the sprem from Tom Lamitina and the woman just carried the baby then they would have a better case. But, I believe that they will not get get this child. Tom Laitina may get visitation rights, but not his child full time and they may even restrict his rights because of the chance he may run off with the baby or barr the mother from the child. Very sticky mess.

Don't mess with Mother Nature, or more accurately, the laws of God. Being, or using, a "surrogate" mother obviously thwarts the plan of our Creator.

What kind of woman can conceive a child with the intentions of giving the baby to someone else? It's not normal or natural.

Also, why would any woman agree to allow her husband to father a child with another woman? In fact, the "surrogate" mother and the husband are now the natural parents of this child. The wife alone has no blood relationship.

If these facts aren't convincing, the emotional pain of the birth mother, the couple who possibly did not get the baby, and eventually, the child who will learn his beginnings deserve to be given serious thought.

NY girl wrote:

i think its her right to keep the baby and its her choice they should have checked the contract! and everybody has a right to change there mind!
she is the biological mom afterall

Though I'm sure many will disagree, their first mistake was getting involved in "surrogacy mothering". Aside from that, how intelligent can this couple be if they did not research everything they should know about Florida's laws on the subject?

They didn't even make sure the contract was signed, not that it would make a difference if the birth mother decided to keep the child she bore.

Mom With Eyes Wide Open,

Apparently your eyes may be open, but ears are blocked shut!!! You must have had your TV on mute because this was NOT a Gestational Surrogacy arrangement. This was a Tradtionaly Surrogacy arrangement. There was NO embryo tranferred at all. This samming woman was insemnated with Lamattina's sperm resulting in pregnancy.

I believe this woman knew exacttly what her game plan was in advance. She was caught smoking and breeching a contract (that she never signed). She should rot in h*ll for using this mans baby as a pawn.

I have been in the online surrogacy world for 5 years and know for a fact the the Lamattinas a wonderful people who have had a child through a previous surrogate and have a wonderful relationship with her even now.

Even still, surrogacy as of late has become so popular that there should be specific laws made to prevent these things from happening. In most states, the contracts are not worth the paper they are written onas they are not legally enforcable. The only laws that are being relyed on are that of adoption. While traditional surrogacy and adoption may seem similar to the average person, let me assure you they are NOT. Surrogacy is where a baby is created specifically with the intent of going to the intended family as opposed to a woman falling pregnant in an untimely manner.

I hope the Lamatinas get their baby.

If you want to engage in the sale of human beings, then you need to expect these problems. I have no pity for any of these people.

Mr. Lamitina chose to make a child with another woman other than his wife. Regardless off the initial intent, that was a choice he made and I am sure he was aware of what could happen.

He SHOULD be paying support for his child. His child deserves the support of her father, regardless of the cirumstances. The child has the right to know and interact with her father as well, so I do hope the parties can work that out for the benefit of the child.

Thank God the mother wisened up and kept her precious baby so that the child will not have to suffer for the rest of her life from being separated from her true, natural mother. Babies DO know that their mothers have been "switched" and grieve for the mother they have bonded with for the last nine months in utero. To think for one minute that babies are mindless blobs is insane. Babies know their mothers AT BIRTH and studies confirm this. Mothers should not be giving their babies to strangers, particularly not in exchange for money.

Traditional surrogacy should be absolutely illegal - outlawed in all 50 states. I pray this is the case that does it for FLA!

I have mixed feelings about this situation. If the mother is keeping the baby for financial gain then I hope the Lamitina's win their suit and get their daughter. On the other hand, if the mother took on the surrogacy thinking that she would be able to just give the baby up, then found out she couldn't, I would side with the mother. I could not imagine having to hand my new born child over to someone else knowing I would never be able to raise her.

Look, just because the contract wasn't signed doesn't mean that there's not a major morality issue here. This kind of thing just makes me sick. This surrogate is the lowest form of life on this planet. Somebody should punch her right in her cooch!

In the cooch? C'mon.

Since your opinion on who should get custody of the baby is consistent with my own, I will refrain from negatively responding to your less than courteous attempt at correcting me on your belief of the facts. Factually speaking, I never implied that it was a Gestational Surrogacy arrangement or that their was an embryo transfer. An embryo is an independent term to describe an unborn child, and this woman initiated an "embryo-hostage situation before giving birth.
I also hope that the Lamatinas get their baby.

If the baby had a voice I bet she would say,
"I WANT MY MOTHER"
and just in case you don't get what I mean...
HER MOTHER