ChatGPT Wrote an Article on Gestational Surrogacy
Although I am a little behind the peak of the trend, I wanted to take this opportunity to see how well ChatGPT can write an article about gestational surrogacy.
ChatGPT (which stands for Chat Generative Pre-trained Transformer), is a large language model-based chatbot developed by OpenAI and launched on November 30, 2022. As I am not a paying customer of OpenAI, I utilized the free version. This slightly older version is based on a dataset of 570 gigabytes of text data, which, for comparison, is approximately 16 times more information than the average person is exposed to throughout their entire lifetime (1).
I crafted a prompt for ChatGPT that would focus on topics that are most relevant to BabyMoon Family, and that includes gestational — as opposed to traditional surrogacy — as well as a focus on queer-identified male parents. For this article, I will share the prompt, followed by ChatGPT’s unedited response, and then I will comment on ChatGPT’s response, highlighting areas that I agree and disagree with.
Here is the prompt I gave to ChatGPT:
Write a discussion analyzing the arguments for and against gestational surrogacy. Do not discuss traditional surrogacy, and discuss specific aspects as it relates to the LGBTQ+ community and same-sex male parents. Include references to research. The article should be about 5 minutes in length for a standard adult reader.
Here is ChatGPT’s article, which it self-titled as: Exploring Gestational Surrogacy: Perspectives, Pros, and Cons for LGBTQ+ Male Parents
Gestational surrogacy, a reproductive arrangement in which a woman carries a pregnancy for another individual or couple, has garnered significant attention in recent years. This practice has particular relevance for the LGBTQ+ community, especially same-sex male parents seeking to have biological children. While proponents emphasize its potential to fulfill dreams of parenthood, critics raise concerns about ethical, legal, and emotional complexities. In this discussion, we delve into the arguments for and against gestational surrogacy in the context of same-sex male parents within the LGBTQ+ community.
Arguments For Gestational Surrogacy:
Parenthood Realization: For same-sex male couples, gestational surrogacy offers a route to biological parenthood that would otherwise be challenging to achieve. With advances in assisted reproductive technology, such as in vitro fertilization (IVF), one partner’s sperm can fertilize a donor egg, which is then implanted into the surrogate’s uterus. This allows the intended fathers to have a genetic connection to their child, fulfilling a deeply personal desire.
Legal Protections: In many countries and states, surrogacy arrangements come with legal frameworks that protect the rights of intended parents. This is especially crucial for LGBTQ+ couples who may face unique legal hurdles when pursuing parenthood. Legal agreements can provide a clear understanding of parental rights and responsibilities, reducing the risk of custody battles.
Emotional Bonds: The journey of gestational surrogacy often involves a close relationship between intended parents and the surrogate. Many surrogates report feeling a strong sense of fulfillment in helping others become parents. These connections can create a supportive environment for the child as they grow, with multiple adults invested in their well-being.
Arguments Against Gestational Surrogacy:
Exploitation and Commercialization: Critics argue that the surrogacy industry can exploit vulnerable women, particularly those from economically disadvantaged backgrounds, by offering financial incentives to carry pregnancies. This raises ethical concerns about the commodification of women’s bodies and the potential for coercion or lack of informed consent.
Emotional Toll: The emotional toll on all parties involved can be substantial. The surrogate may develop a strong attachment to the fetus, and the intended parents might experience anxiety and uncertainty during the pregnancy. Emotional conflicts could arise if expectations are not met or if communication breaks down.
Identity and Stigma: Some critics fear that gestational surrogacy reinforces the idea that biological connection is paramount to parenthood. This perspective could undermine the legitimacy of families formed through adoption or other means. Additionally, LGBTQ+ families may face stigmatization or discrimination, potentially impacting the child’s well-being.
The LGBTQ+ Perspective:
For same-sex male parents in the LGBTQ+ community, gestational surrogacy presents a unique opportunity to establish a biological connection with their child. This can have positive psychological impacts on both parents and children, bolstering their sense of identity and belonging. Research has shown that children raised by same-sex parents fare just as well as those raised by heterosexual parents in terms of emotional, psychological, and social outcomes.^[1]^ However, it’s important to note that successful parenting goes beyond biological ties, emphasizing the significance of a nurturing environment.
Conclusion:
Gestational surrogacy is a complex issue with arguments both in favor of and against its practice. For LGBTQ+ same-sex male parents, it offers a pathway to parenthood that might otherwise be unattainable. While concerns about exploitation and emotional complexities are valid, proper legal frameworks, ethical considerations, and emotional support can mitigate these challenges. As society evolves, it’s imperative to continue the conversation, examining research and personal experiences, to ensure that all individuals have the opportunity to create loving, nurturing families through various means.
[1]: Gartrell, N., Bos, H., & Peyser, H. (2017). Patterns of Relationship Satisfaction in Adoptive, Two-Father, and Two-Mother Families. Family Process, 56(2), 438–453. doi:10.1111/famp.12236
Overall, I am not unimpressed with ChatGPTs article. I believe that the response does capture some of the most crucial arguments both for and against gestational surrogacy and the LGBTQ+ community, but there is a lack of nuance in the descriptions. For example, having genetically-related children is a ‘deeply personal desire’ for some intended fathers, but it is not always the primary reason for men to pursue surrogacy. I described the research around motivations for men to pursue surrogacy in a previous BabyMoon Family article (https://medium.com/@babymoonfamily/from-stonewall-to-surrogacy-the-lgbtq-community-and-family-planning-bc981cd27e47). Also, nothing about surrogacy de-legitimizes families who are formed through adoption, so I don’t believe this argument against surrogacy made by ChatGPT holds any weight.
As for the legal protections, there is a great deal of variability for these, both among states in the U.S. as well as among countries. Surrogacy-friendly states, such as California, will allow for both intended male parents to be listed as the parents of record on their child’s birth certificate, but this is not universally recognized, especially in a country such as Italy. I have also written about Italy’s rapid decline for same-sex parents in a previous BabyMoon article, where they not only do not recognize both parents in same-sex relationships, they are actively working to remove lesbian parents from pre-existing birth certificates (https://medium.com/@babymoonfamily/why-every-lgbtq-person-especially-intended-parents-ips-should-be-furious-at-italy-right-now-cfb8a4382532).
One area that ChatGPT got both very right and very wrong is the emotional bonds and relationships that develop throughout the surrogacy journey. The relationship between the intended fathers and their GC is often a deep and profound connection, and surrogacy agencies work to match IPs and GCs who are aligned and can form this type of bond. However, this process also involves psychological screening and support for both GCs and IPs before and throughout the journey, to avoid any misunderstandings as to the relationships and connections with the child. Agencies provide a great deal of support for both parties and can also function as arbitrators for any discussions that can be more anxiety provoking. However, the media portrayal of emotionally dysfunctional relationships between the GC and IPs — as was displayed in Netflix’s ‘The Surrogacy’ and negatively critiqued by me in a previous article (https://medium.com/@babymoonfamily/netflixs-the-surrogacy-a-terrible-portrayal-of-surrogacy-that-comes-at-a-bad-time-b8e87ecf29dc) — are not at all common.
In terms of exploitation, this is a genuine argument that warrants mentioning. Unfortunately, a lack of regulation in countries such as Nigeria (2) and more recently in Greece (3) show that exploitation can happen with surrogacy arrangements. This is why I believe and advocate whole-heartedly for clear and abundant regulations around gestational surrogacy. This may seem counterintuitive given that BabyMoon Family exists to advocate for surrogacy to be more widely available, but it is a complex arrangement that requires strong medical, legal, and social oversight in order to ensure that all parties are well respected, integrated, and engaging in the way in which they want. I believe this can only happen through strict laws and oversight from a country or state, and I believe California is an excellent example of a place where gestational surrogacy can be well regulated in order to thrive in an ethical and transparent way.
Lastly, ChatGPT accurately describes the stigma and its potential impact on same-sex parents and their children. I described the current research that ChatGPT alludes to that children with same-sex parents function as well as, or even better than, children from comparable, heteronormative family structures, as well as the research that shows that stigma against same-sex parents does negatively impact rainbow families (https://medium.com/@babymoonfamily/discussing-the-primal-wound-theory-and-surrogacy-3160686119a6). However, this research concludes that the main issue is not about surrogacy or same-sex parents, but rather about policy and social issues that should be addressed to remove this stigma, allowing rainbow families to live without discrimination.
ChatGPT did have one ‘hallucination,’ which is the term used to describe when AI fabricates facts. In this case, ChatGPT made up the reference with regard to the emotional, psychological, and social outcomes of children from same-sex parents. While the sentiment and conclusion of the statement is correct, the actual reference does not exist. However, ChatGPT did a good job of ‘hallucinating’ the correct author, as Nanett Gartrell is a leading academic authority and lesbian woman who has written numerous articles on sexual minority parenting (4). I think this is a good example of AI ‘hallucinating’ in that it gets the concept and the main author of the research correct, but it creates a reference that is likely a combination of different papers rather than one single article.
There is no doubt that ChatGPT is a powerful tool, and generative AI already has and will continue to change the way we work and function. It was interesting to see that several previous BabyMoon Family articles have already addressed some of the key concepts that ChatGPT identified. However, as others have noted, ChatGPT is a great ‘starting point’ for a discussion, piece of writing, or brainstorming, but it still does a somewhat cursory overview of topics that are often much more layered and complex. We shall see how later generations of ChatGPT, Google’s Bard, and other large-language models ‘evolve’ in their ability to gain deeper understanding for complicated topics.
References: