Click on each item to view/hide the questions.

Show all Remember Remember questions

Literary questions for reading groups

For discussion

Q. What is the purpose of the prologue in this book?

Q. If you only heard Jessica’s side of the story what misconceptions would you retain?

Q. Doris’ story unravels backwards in time. Why do you think the author chose this technique? How effective is it?

Q. Doris used to be first on Pandora’s ‘prayer list’. She has now ‘consigned her grandmother to the past tense’. Why? What are the implications of this?

Q. Jessica is more disturbed by her father’s part in the big deception than her mother’s. Why is this? What do you think of his response to the question she asked as a child in the garden?

Q. Recalling her mother’s suppressed grief, Jessica asks: ‘All the anger I see in her now, all the fear, is it the emotion finding expression at last?’ What do you think?

Q. In the second half of the book we get an explanation for many of Doris’ behaviours. Does this change your feelings about her? Would knowing change the attitude of her carers?

Q. ‘Step by step she has sunk down to the basement of her being,’ Jessica says of her mother. Why do you think the author chose this analogy?

Q. Doris uses her own names for the carers. What other devices are employed to give the reader insight into Doris’ perceptions when she is unable to communicate effectively? Which is the most effective for you?

Q. Family sagas that span generations can be challenging for the reader. Doris and Jessica share certain experiences: losing a brother at a young age, having a selfish sister, being a driven person. Why do you feel the author added this extra potential for confusion?

Q. What new insights into dementia did you gain from this book?

Moral and ethical questions

Remember, Remember revolves around the central theme of autonomy, respect and justice in relation to someone who has lost the capacity to defend her own rights and interests.

Rights and interests

Q. Putting Doris into a home is a difficult decision for Jessica. Choosing an expensive home, visiting her frequently, could be seen as more about her own interests than Doris’. To what extent would you say this applies?

Q. Doris is no longer aware of what is being done with her property or money. Beatrice and Adeline believe that this means the family’s needs and wishes trump hers. Do you agree?

Q. Pandora feels she is neglected because her mother is preoccupied with Doris. Who do you think has the prior claim?

Q. Jessica says that dementia itself is ‘an abuse of human rights.’ Do you agree with her?

Q. Jessica is unwilling to marry Aaron if she has a strong likelihood of developing Alzheimer’s. What do you think of both his and her reactions to this concern?

Q. The Morningside staff and the family criticise Jessica for taking too little care of her own interests. Is this justified?

Q. As Doris deteriorates Jessica gives up her career, her freedom, her relationship with Aaron. Was she right to do so? Would you have done the same? Beatrice, Adeline, Pandora and Aaron all have a different take on her motives and actions. With whom do you most identify?

Autonomy and paternalism

Q. When she was mentally competent Doris said that

1. she wanted to stay in her own home and
2. she did not want her life to be prolonged if she developed a condition such a dementia.

To what extent should her wishes have been respected/over-ruled at the different stages of the illness?

Q. The staff in the home discuss the issue of

1. involving Doris in research
2. giving her medication disguised in food, and
3. resuscitating her.

To what extent do you agree or disagree with Jessica’s and Aaron’s views on these practices? (Chapter 8) Who should decide?

Q. When Doris first started showing signs of dementia, both she and Jessica explained them away. Did their arguments ring true? Subsequently Jessica felt she had done her mother a disservice not acknowledging her problems earlier on. Had she?

Confidentiality and the right to know

Q. The lawyer, Simon Montgomery-Bates; the GP, Dr Robartz; Doris’ solicitor; and Aaron Wiseman, all have to consider the conflict of telling versus concealing information. To what extent do you agree with their choices?

Q. Aaron changes his mind about telling Jessica what he knows (Chapter 8). Do you agree with his rationale?

Proxy decision making

Q. Jessica’s sister and aunt repeatedly challenge her decisions on behalf of Doris. How would you suggest family tensions like this should be handled?

Q. Given the information that eventually came to light, how morally acceptable was it for Jessica to take the responsibilities for Doris which she did – both practical and ethical?

Balance of burdens and benefits

Q. The ‘ten commandments’ of care are designed in the interests of people with dementia. But Jessica feels they have added to her burden of guilt because she can’t live up to them. Discuss the practical and moral implications of this tension.

Ethical issues relating to end of life

Q. Jessica tells James that she plans to opt out of life if she shows signs of developing dementia. Do you think she would in fact do so? And if so, what route might she take and what might prevent her being successful? Do you agree with her decision?

Q. Medication or poison can be the same thing, just given in different quantities, Jessica says. When does a merciful act become murder?

Q. When Doris becomes aggressive and difficult to handle in the home Jessica wonders, ‘…wouldn’t she be better off… dead?’ What do you think?

Q. Pandora, Doris and Jessica discuss the idea that elderly people should be allowed to die if they feel they’re a burden on their families (Chapter 18). Whose view do you support?

Ethical issues related to the management of people with dementia

Q. James, Pandora and Jessica all have different reactions to the use of sedatives for people with dementia. What is your view?

Q. At various points Jessica uses restraint and verbal assault. What do you think of her actions?

Q. Beatrice suggests electronic tagging as a way of keeping track of Doris’ movements. What is your reaction to such a tactic?

Q. Jessica asks, ‘But is this shell really still my mum?’ How would you answer her?

Q. How acceptable do you think it is for the staff in the home to

1. dress Doris in clothes she would never have worn in the past
2. give her food and drink she used to dislike
3. use childish expressions and endearments when speaking to her?

Aaron and Jessica use the same terms for those they love. Does this change your assessment?

Q. When Jessica finds the photograph of the Fenton family with Doris’ face scratched out she takes this as evidence that Doris was aware of losing her grip on reality? Do you agree with her analysis? She asks: ‘What must it do to a person to contemplate their living extinction?’ What are the implications of such an awareness?

Q. Beatrice says that luxury and sacrifice are wasted on Doris. Is this a fair statement? Would it be true of anyone who is at an advanced stage of Alzheimer’s?

Q. Sometimes Jessica resorts to streams of words which could be construed as mocking and disrespectful. She defends them as a release for her frustration. How morally acceptable is this? Would it be defensible if staff in the home did the same thing?

Q. The Morningside was the chosen place for Doris on the basis that: ‘Person-centred care was their watchword. Space, flexibility, privacy, respect, realising full potential.’ How would you rate each of these elements in assessing the excellence of care for people with dementia?

Q. The doctors are reluctant to give Doris a label. What are the consequences of this

1. for Doris herself and
2. for Jessica?

Justice

Q. Jessica came close to killing her mother. Given the situation and provocation, how compassionate do you think society and the courts should be in dealing with such cases?

Q. Jessica hides her mother’s stealing by disposing of the articles in ways that salve her own conscience. Do you approve or disapprove?

Resource allocation

Q. Care in The Morningside costs £968.80 a week, £50,000 a year. What do you think about that? Should families be forced to sell houses to fund care of this sort?

Q. Jessica appeals against the decision not to fund medication for Doris to slow the progression of her illness. Discuss the issues of

1. postcode lotteries,
2. official guidelines on what may be funded
3. prolonging different phases of dementia.

Q. NICE decides which drugs may be funded by the NHS in England and Wales but not in Scotland. The GP says they are ‘trying to juggle fairness with sound economics’. The Patients Association complains that they are ‘bureaucratic, unaccountable and run by economists not doctors’. Dr Thain of Tavistock says their decisions smack of ‘a principle of equal unfairness: don’t do a good turn for anyone in case you have to do it for everyone.’ What do you think of their role, their sphere of influence, their decisions, as outlined in this book?

Q. It is predicted that as the population ages there will be a steep rise in the number of people with dementia. Which of the issues raised in this book do you think should inform decision-making in respect of

1. care and
2. resource allocation?

Click on each item to view/hide the questions.

Show all Right to Die questions

Literary questions for reading groups

For discussion

Q. Was a diary format an appropriate choice for this novel? How else might the author have dealt with Adam’s story?

Q. Joel becomes increasingly involved in Adam and Naomi’s lives as the disease progresses. What do you feel is happening here?

Q. Dr Curtis is seen as a friend and ally by both Adam and Naomi; how does the narrative develop this idea?

Q. What do you think Dr Curtis did in the final scenes? What gives you this sense?

Q. Naomi’s thoughts as she reads the diary after Adam’s death give depth and perspective to Adam’s personal account. How would the story have differed without her input? Would your view of Adam have been different?

Q. Serious issues can weigh a novel down. What techniques has the author used to lighten the tone?

Q. The theme of suicide recurs throughout the book. How psychologically plausible do you find the characters who contemplate it or carry it out?

Q. Would the story have been different if the reader had greater insight into the minds of Dr Curtis or Mavis or Joel?

Q. Lydia is a strong character in the life of Adam; Brendan less so. Discuss their significance in this story.

Moral and ethical questions

Right to Die revolves around the central theme of when and in what circumstances it might be permissible to assist someone to die.

Respect for autonomy

Q. Adam is an intelligent, mentally-competent individual, well aware of the implications of his diagnosis. He believes it is his right to choose the manner and timing of his death. What arguments could you put forward to counter his claim?

Q. He tells Naomi: ‘If Curtis could promise to help me when my time’s up, I’d probably keep going longer because I’d feel secure. If he won’t give that undertaking, I might have to decide sooner while I still have the capacity to do it myself.’ Discuss.

Q. A ‘good life’ with Motor Neurone Disease means one thing to Adam but something different to his neurologist who sees degenerative diseases all the time. What are the implications of this discrepancy?

Q. Adam asks his GP: ‘How will I know when it’s the right time to say enough is enough?’ What factors would weigh for you in such a situation?

Q. How much do the beliefs and opinions of a) his GP b) his neurologist c) his physiotherapist d) his mother, limit Adam’s autonomy? Is this ultimately helpful or unhelpful?

Q. To what extent should couple - or family-autonomy override individual autonomy?

Rights and interests

Q. Naomi, Mavis and Joel all have a personal interest in the timing of Adam’s death. What rights, if any, have they in the matter?

Q. Dr Curtis believes he has a right not to do anything which compromises his own moral principles. Dr Devlin says that patients ‘cannot be allowed to dictate the moral values of medicine.’ Whose rights should take precedence?

Q. Should the next-of-kin be allowed to overrule

1. a patient’s request not to be resuscitated?
2. an advance directive?
3. a wish to donate an organ or the body to medical science?

If so, in what circumstances?

Conflicts between autonomy and paternalism

Q. Even were assisted dying to be legally permissible, Dr Curtis says, he would still be reluctant to help Adam to die when he requests it. Should such paternalism be permissible?

Q. Consider the results if the GP had agreed to Adam’s request for help in dying

1. shortly after diagnosis
2. just before he went to Madeira
3. as soon as he became unable to kill himself.

In your judgement, at what point would that have been the optimal timing?

Confidentiality and the right to know

Q. Dr Curtis is scrupulous about preserving confidences. Neither Adam nor Naomi know the extent of the struggles the other is grappling with. Was this in their best interests?

Q. Naomi makes unilateral decisions about parenthood without reference to Adam because she doesn’t want to further undermine his will to live. Was she right to do so?

Balance of burdens and benefits

Q. Adam has to balance the burdens of his disease against the benefits of staying alive longer. His wife, his writing, completing his novel weigh with him. What things would persuade you to keep going in such a situation?

Ethical issues relating to assisted dying

Q. Adam says he doesn’t want to be cared for so expertly that his dying is ‘strung out way past the point of common sense.’ How far do you feel the availability of good palliative care influences opinion on assisted dying?

Q. Adam sees a huge paradox between abortion on demand and the legal prohibition against assisted dying for patients who are capable of deciding for themselves. Discuss.

Q. Dr Curtis says that causing death is not the same as allowing to die. Do you agree?

Q. What do you think he did in the final stage of Adam’s life? Do you approve of his actions? If not, why not?

Q. Adam’s mother, Mavis, holds strong and immovable religious scruples against assisted dying and suicide. How far should such beliefs govern what is legally permissible?

Q. The Most Reverend Wilberforce J J Kingsley’s thought-for-the-day outlines a distinction between the sanctity of life and the value of life which Adam sees as relevant to his right to die. Do you agree?

Q. The law currently prohibits assisted dying.

1. Should it be changed?
2. If so, what caveats should be applied to minimise the risks?

Q. Should there be criteria set for people who go abroad for assisted death or should the desire for death suffice?

Q. Animals can be put down to prevent or end suffering; humans can’t. Discuss.

Ethical issues related to Motor Neurone Disease

Q. How ethically acceptable do you feel it is to use stem cells from a) an embryo or b) an adult, to treat MND?

Q. Adam’s cousin, Milly, fears she might have inherited the same disease. What are the implications of offering screening to relatives in cases of inherited disorders?

Justice

Q. Adam says it is easier for someone in a persistent vegetative state or on a life support system to be helped to die than for him. ‘Where’s the justice?’ Discuss.

Q What does dignity involve for you?

Q. Adam argues that the money spent on his terminal care would be better spent on patients with some hope of benefit. Is this a sufficiently powerful argument for ending his life?

Virtue

Q. Would you say that Dr Curtis was a virtuous doctor? If not, how would you categorise his response to Adam’s need?

Click on each item to view/hide the questions.

Show all Vacant Possession questions

Literary questions for reading groups

For discussion

Q. Bill Faraday is the central character in the first part of this book; Geoff Ar chibald takes over. To what extent does this development influence the story?

Q. Neither Viv nor Rhona can contribute to the debate. How real are their characters viewe d through the eyes of their relatives?

Q. Frances Faraday is seen as someone who is less than honest. How does her religious life square with this trait?

Q. How compatible do you feel Rhona and Geoff Archibald were before her suicide attempt?

Q. Why do you feel Geoff chose to keep his suspicions from the police for as long as he did? Were his scruples justifiable in the circumstances?

Q. Bill comes in for strong criticism. Do you think he was a good father?

Q. How big a part does deception play in this book?

Moral and ethical questions

Vacant Possession revolves around the central theme of decision making on behalf of the mentally incompetent.

Proxy decision making

Q. Dr Steven Wilkinson says that it is his responsibility to decide what should be done for Viv Faraday but he looks to the family to guide him as to Viv's own wishes when she was competent to decide.

1. To what extent should the family influence medical decisions?
2. Is there a moral difference between a decision about abortion and a decision about other forms of medical intervention?

Q. Geoff Archibald, and Bill, Frances, Kevin and Euan Faraday all contemplate abortion on behalf of their female relatives who are no longer able to state their own wishes.

1. Should parents, husbands and/or siblings of the mentally incompetent patient have equal rights to contribute to the decision making process?
2. If not, whose voice should take precedence in the event of conflict?
3. Bill Faraday considers Viv's mother and brothers have forfeited their right to a voice because of 'desertion'. Is he right?
4. Should a social father have the same rights to a voice in decision making as a biological father?

Q. Neither Viv nor Rhona specifically contemplated persistent vegetative state or rape prior to lapsing into a comatose state. How far is it relevant to extrapolate their preferences from their stated views on related topics?

Q. Dr Charles Wynne-Hope says ‘I can't make good decisions if I don't care about the patients - if I'm not touched by the effect on the families.’ How far should medical personnel allow their emotions to enter into decision making?

Rights and interests

Q. Does Viv's unborn child have any rights in the circumstances recounted in Vacant Possession?

Q. In the decision about whether or not to abort her fetus, Euan Faraday believes that Viv is not the only member of the family who counts. Is he right? If so, who else should be counted and on what grounds?

Q. Rhona Archibald knows nothing and may be said to have no interests of her own except in so far as they affect others. Can Geoff legitimately ignore what would be her interests if she were mentally competent and aware where these conflict with his own?

Q. Bill has his own private reasons for withholding consent to DNA testing. DS Latimer tells him the law can overrule his refusal. Given all the circumstances should this be permissible?

Disclosure of information

Q. Geoff is infuriated by his GP's unwillingness to share with him information about Rhona which might help him to understand why she attempted to end her life. However, the doctor does agree to divulge confidential information to the medical team caring for her now. Is the GP's position ethically defensible?

Competence to decide

Q. Ten-year-old Ginny is facing a second bone marrow transplant for a recurrence of her leukaemia. Frances Faraday argues that she is not competent to decide for herself whether or not to undergo the procedure.

1. Should such a child be allowed to i) accept or ii) refuse such a procedure?
2. Is there a moral difference in deciding for a course of action which will end in death as distinct from one which offers a hope of life?
3. Does it take a higher level of competence to decide to forgo rather than accept treatment for a potentially fatal illness?
4. Would the eventual outcome of such a decision influence your argument?

Respect for autonomy

Q. Respect for autonomy involves letting competent adults choose for themselves even when their decisions may involve harmful consequences, Dr Wilkinson tells the Faradays. Is this an appropriate delegation of responsibility? Under what circumstances should doctors be permitted to overrule patients/relatives' decisions?

Conflicts between ethical principles

Q. News of a rape in Chivenings could have a potentially disastrous effect on the management and future of the Home.

1. Would Dr Steven Wilkinson be justified in keeping the information quiet to prevent adverse reactions?
2. Is it ever ethically acceptable to sacrifice the good of the individual in the interests of the many?

Q. Dr Steven Wilkinson faces a situation where it appears a rapist is loose in his Home. He briefly contemplates putting the female patients on contraceptives to prevent further pregnancies. Could such a decision be morally justified?

Q. Is it ever ethically defensible to sterilise a mentally incompetent patient to avoid the risk of pregnancy?

Justice

Q. In Geoff's mental rehearsal of the arguments, the judge suggests that it is a waste of courtroom time and taxpayers' money to debate the issues for an insentient woman. Resources should rather be diverted to ensure legal representation for mentally competent but distressed victims of violent assault. Is he right?

Click on each item to view/hide the questions.

Show all Paternity questions

Literary questions for reading groups

For discussion

Q. This story is predicated on secrets. How justifiable were they?

Q. Judy is a midwife. How much does her work influence developments in her personal life? Do you like her as a person?

Q. Sid Robertson and Jim Burrows are very different characters facing similar situations. How far do their contrasting responses a) fit with their personalities and b) influence the story?

Q. Sian, Declan and Georgina were brought up together by the same parents. What features of their upbringing do you think influenced each of them most?

Q. Declan has a rose-tinted picture of Judy. In what ways is he deluded and how does this influence developments in their relationship? If you were a marriage guidance counsellor what advice would you give them?

Q. In Declan’s shoes would you have responded to Dr Farnham’s revelation in the same way? What are the consequences of Declan’s decision not to tell Judy what he knows?

Moral and ethical questions

Paternity revolves around the central theme of what should be permissible in relation to assisted reproduction involving donated gametes.

Respect for autonomy

Q. When Dan Allanwood donated his sperm for medical use, the prevailing policies and procedures failed to detect the presence of a faulty gene, to prevent inadvertent incest, or to minimise the risk of a serious genetic defect in future offspring. How might the risk of these developments have been minimised?

Q. Until recently artificial insemination in the UK has been predicated on donor anonymity. Real life cases have challenged this practice and the law has now changed. Should sperm donors be

• identifiable?
• traceable?
• paid?

Q. Isobel and Sid Robertson, and Betty Burrows all decided not to tell their children about the artificial insemination. Why did they withhold this information and were they right to do so?

Disclosure of information

Q. Both Declan Robertson and Judy Burrows had the names of their social rather than biological fathers on their birth certificate. Is this practice ethically acceptable?

Q. Georgina Robertson knows she may carry a faulty recessive gene. Just how much should she divulge to any partner with whom she plans to have a child?

Q. Imagine you are a) Sian, b) Declan and c) Georgina Robertson. How much will you tell your own children about their genetic history?

Rights and responsibilities

Q. Judy tells her mother that in cases involving donated gametes, the children's rights should be considered. What are those rights and in the event of conflict, whose needs and rights should take precedence, the donors' or the children's?

Q. Is there a greater moral responsibility attached to donating sperm rather than blood or a kidney?

Conflicts between beneficence and autonomy

Q. Bethany Robertson died because both her parents carried a faulty recessive gene. What are the advantages and disadvantages of gene therapy?

Q. The chaplain, Geoff Frazer, comments on slippery moral slopes in two ways: Slopes are only dangerously slippery if you're not properly prepared or dressed for them … It's up to these official committees - and all of us, I guess - to monitor progress and ensure we don't venture onto slippery slopes unwarily. We must have sufficient resolution and integrity to pull back if we feel there's a danger of it getting too skiddy. We need to have the courage and strength of purpose to know we'll do the right thing when the next moral choice has to be made, not sit there feeling so weak that we say no to any progress. To what extent do you share these views?

Q. While Judy is grappling with the options available to them for creating a child who is free from the serious medical condition from which Bethany died, she hears a professor of medical ethics speaking of "perilous knowledge". How far should people be protected from potentially serious information about their genetic predisposition?

Q. Dr Keith Galloway did not share his suspicions about Judy and Declan with the Robertsons, his concern being only with issues of medical benefit. Dr Henrietta Farnham saw this as paternalistic behaviour. Who is right?

Justice

Q. With resources limited in a state-funded health service

1. Should infertility treatment be freely available to anyone who wants it?
2. Should there be limits set to who may receive it? If so, on what grounds?
3. Do doctors have a moral responsibility for making such choices?

Ethical issues relating to artificial or assisted reproduction

Q. Declan, Georgina and Judy all react differently to news of their origins. Are their reactions equally defensible?

Q. Georgina perceives an ethical difference for medical staff between helping to create a new life and performing other medical procedures. How valid is such a distinction?

Q. Geoff Frazer has views on embryo destruction, infertility treatment, and allocation of resources (Chapter 33). To what extent do you share his conclusions?

Q. Sid and Isobel chose to undergo infertility treatment far from home. What are the advantages and disadvantages of such a course of action?

Q. If Sid and Isobel had elected to adopt a child instead of having infertility treatment, the medical, social and psychological vetting processes would have been much more rigorous than they were for assisted reproduction. Is this difference ethically defensible?

Q. In the case of both the Robertsons and the Burrows, the donor was selected to resemble the social fathers on basic characteristics such as height, colouring, ethnic origin.

1. To what extent and based on which characteristics should couples be given a choice of sperm donor?
2. Is there a slippery slope to the creation of designer babies?

Click on each item to view/hide the questions.

Show all Double Trouble questions

Literary questions for reading groups

For discussion

Q. Motherhood features strongly in this novel. How good a mother do you think each of the women was?

Q. Nicholas, Donella, Declan and Roberta took a number of different steps to prevent the disclosure of information which they preferred to keep private. They did not anticipate the effect of Graeme Robertson's mental instability. What other chinks do you perceive in this family's armour?

Q. How would you describe the relationship between Nicholas and Donella? Do statements they make themselves on the subject square with your view?

Q. Professor Richard Halley is a powerful man. How much does he influence what happens to his family? Do you approve of his behaviour? Do you like him?

Q. Which characters emerge as having most integrity? How do the others fall short of their standard?

Q. If you were writing the sequel to this story what would happen in it?

Q. Did you anticipate the ending of this story? Can you find cues retrospectively? How did you respond to it? Why?

Moral and ethical questions

Double Trouble revolves around the central theme of what should be permissible in relation to assisted reproduction involving surrogacy.

Respect for autonomy and paternalism

Q. Professor Dick Halley is personally strongly opposed to surrogacy. Is it acceptable that he, as a clinician specialising in helping infertile couples, should refuse to be involved with patients who wish to go down this route?

Q. Donella Halley argues that a surrogate mother had just as much right to terminate a pregnancy as she would have if it were "normally" conceived. Do you think she is right? If not, why not?

Disclosure of information, rights and responsibilities

Q. When the information about Judy and Declan Robertson impinges on the happiness of her own son, Roberta Mansfield/Halley feels differently about it compared with her reaction when the Robertsons were merely patients. To what extent should doctors allow emotion to affect their judgement in decision making?

Confidentiality and the right to know

Q. Even in the face of Donella's direct appeal for information that concerns her and her unborn child, Roberta withholds it. Is this an appropriate interpretation of her duty to maintain medical confidentiality?

Conflicts between beneficence and autonomy

Q. Roberta tries to protect her son from the consequences of genetic inbreeding. Were her actions morally defensible?

Ethical issues relating to artificial or assisted reproduction

Q. Nicholas is very keen to have a child of his own. When he weighs up the pros and cons of infertile couples acquiring a child through assisted means, he comes to the conclusion that there are more arguments in favour than against. How many of his arguments would you be persuaded by?

Q. Imagine you are

1. a social worker considering Nicholas and Heidi for adoption of a child,
2. a fertility specialist considering them for assisted conception.

Would you approve them as prospective parents? To what extent would the criteria you use differ in the two scenarios?

Ethical issues relating to surrogacy

Q. When Nicholas questions his father on the idea that surrogacy is a form of adultery, Dick reassures him that it is not. Is there technically a moral difference between a couple inserting warm semen into the woman in a private bedroom compared with doctors doing the same thing in a medical clinic, as Dick suggests? Does the experience of Nicholas and Donella alter your theoretical view?

Q. What are the advantages and disadvantages of

1. the surrogate mother staying in touch with the commissioning couple?
2. the surrogate mother being a relative?
3. involving a surrogacy agency?

Q. Maintaining secrecy is much more difficult with surrogacy than donor insemination. What steps might Donella and Nicholas have taken to protect themselves from outside criticism?

Q. The two couples begin with strict rules of behaviour to ensure no breaches of propriety and taste. By the fourth attempt several of these minimum requirements are no longer in place. Which basic safeguards do you think are essential in such a transaction?

Justice

Q. Nicholas believes the law is right to give custody of the child to the biological mother in the event of a dispute. Do you agree?