Sections

Deborah Glick Key Hurdle on Gestational Surrogacy

Stonewall Democrats rip lesbian lawmaker for betraying a pledge

Community News Group
Share on TwitterTweet
Share on Facebook
Subscribe

Don’t miss our updates:

Out lesbian Assemblymember Deborah Glick of Manhattan is said to be pushing back against an 11th-hour push to legalize gestational surrogacy in New York, angering the Stonewall Democratic Club of New York City and others in the community just months after she told that club she supported the measure.

Glick, who did not return multiple phone calls for this story, landed the endorsement of Stonewall in her re-election bid last year after telling the club in a questionnaire that she supported legalizing gestational surrogacy.

But she remained tight-lipped when reached by Gay City News on June 10 about her position on the bill, saying that she would need to call back, though she never did. She did not respond to multiple requests for comment at the time, but two days later told The New York Times — which reaches a broader audience — that gestational surrogacy amounts to “pregnancy for a fee, and I find that commodification of women troubling.”

The bill, which has been increasingly shrouded in controversy over women’s rights issues, now faces gloomy prospects in the lower chamber. Stonewall’s president, Rod Townsend, expressed disappointment over Glick’s apparent about-face and the bill’s loss of momentum after he expected it to pass this year.

“It’s been on our endorsement surveys for years and going back to 2014, no one seeking our endorsement has supported keeping the ban on the books,” Townsend told Gay City News. “To hear that Assemblymember Deborah Glick, a champion and member of our community, has reversed her stated support on the issue is a shock to our members.”

He continued, “Folks want to start their families without having to leave the state and jump through legal hurdles. We know and admire the assemblymember, and we feel betrayed.”

The bill cleared the State Senate under the leadership of out gay State Senator Brad Hoylman of Manhattan, who championed the measure in the upper chamber and issued emotional pleas for the legislation by sharing stories and photos of his own experience having two daughters through gestational surrogacy.

The issue heated up significantly in the final weeks of the legislative session, with Governor Andrew Cuomo intensively campaigning for it with multiple events in both New York City and Albany. The bill’s lead sponsor in the Assembly, Amy Paulin of Westchester, told Gay City News on June 10 that she and her colleagues were seeking to whip enough votes while simultaneously sweetening the pot with extra healthcare and legal protections for the women who would carry the babies.

Some have expressed concern that gestational surrogacy creates a class divide in which wealthier couples take advantage of lower-income women who serve as surrogates. Glick also told The Times that she is not certain that gestational surrogacy is an issue for the broader LGBTQ community, saying, “This is clearly a problem for the well-heeled,” a reference to the tens of thousands of dollars in cost associated with the process.

Meanwhile, Hoylman defended the bill in an interview with Gay City News on May 31 when he said the protections included in the legislation would serve as safeguards for those who would otherwise end up traveling to other states where legal protections for surrogates are weaker.

Now, with mere hours remaining in the legislative session, which is due to finish up tomorrow, June 19, lawmakers appear poised to depart Albany without passing a bill that disproportionately affects the LGBTQ community.

Jared Arader, who leads the Lambda Independent Democrats of Brooklyn — another LGBTQ club — also conveyed his displeasure over the bill stalling in the Assembly.

“It is very disappointing to see a small group of our traditional allies holding this up,” said Arader. “How can we be one of only three states not permitting gestational surrogacy, in 2019, on the eve of WorldPride? Are they going to let such inequality continue in to 2020?”

The bill has wide support among Democratic assemblymembers, including three women — Aravella Simotas of Queens, Tremaine Wright of Brooklyn, and Monica P. Wallace of Erie County — who voted for it when it passed the Judiciary Committee in February, in addition to numerous women co-sponsors.

“At the end of the day, we will be able to persuade anyone who has that concern that the current law exploits women surrogates and that the new law will be the gold standard,” Paulin said confidently on June 10. “Our residents are going to those states [where some form of gestational surrogacy is legal] and there are no protections.”

But Paulin appears to have hit a wall in her effort to convince her colleagues to rally around the bill, even with assistance from Cuomo. The governor dismissed the bill’s opponents several times during recent press conferences and rallies, saying that the piece of legislation boasts the strongest protections in the nation and is long overdue. Yet, in his aggressive defense of it, he has also managed to drift into politically dangerous territory by seeming to explain women’s rights to longtime feminists.

“It’s a woman’s body, it’s a woman’s choice — that a woman is equal to a man in every manner, shape, or form and she can make a decision for herself,” he said on June 10, drawing criticism from Glick.

Other less controversial bills pertaining to the LGBTQ community have either cruised to passage or are already considered to have more than enough votes to pass. The State Assembly and Senate approved a bill restoring LGBTQ veterans with benefits they lost when they were discharged under Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, while a law banning the so-called “gay and trans panic defense” is expected to be approved before the session is complete.

Updated 2:30 pm, June 19, 2019
Today’s news:
Share on TwitterTweet
Share on Facebook
Subscribe

Don’t miss our updates:


Reader feedback

Charles from Chelsea says:
I’m really surprised by Deborah’s betrayal. I used to like her but now she seems out of touch with her constituents. With actions like this I certainly won’t support her again.
June 19, 10:56 am
Samuel from Chelsea says:
The gall of Glick. If she truly sees this as a "well-heeled" issue, and not as one of the rights of LGBT parents, she doesn't need our "well-heeled" money anymore. I look forward to donating to the dog catcher running against her in the next election.
June 19, 3:45 pm
Steve from Chelsea says:
Glick has become a DINO (Dem in name only) on this important issue and her actions and about-face position on this long overdue bill is clear grounds that she needs to be booted from her well-heeled seat.
June 19, 4:54 pm
Sarah from East Village says:
As a feminist and a lesbian I am appalled by Ms. Glick. Her position seems to smack of homophobia against gay men. She is creating this notion of the rich gay man exploiting some poor unsuspecting woman. In my circles, nothing can be further from the truth. I know men who saved their pennies for YEARS to be able to afford surrogacy, and I know a woman who was a surrogate who was treated with the utmost respect. I am used to the radical right painting with a broad negative brush. Never would I have expected Deborah to cast aspersions on gay men -- and no less to spread a myth that it's an issue only for privileged ones. I had hoped she'd one day be our Congresswoman but now I will not support her.
June 19, 8:29 pm
Lisa from West Village says:
Glick's objections sound like the far right's insistence that marriage equality would somehow hurt children and churches. It is simply not based in fact. The surrogacy bill is one of the strongest in the nation when it comes to protections for women and babies. It is odd that nearly all of the people opposed to this have never been through the process/have never been surrogates. Her objection really boils down to, "ick, I am uncomfortable with this. No surrogacy for anyone." I would expect this from the GOP but not a lifelong Democrat. Hopefully Glick will have a well-heeled challenger who can oust her next June. This 1000000 term relic of the past has got to go.
June 20, 12:27 am
david from east village says:
Very simple remedy: vote her out. She lied and proved herself to be a typical politician backing out of her promises. Next!
June 20, 12:11 pm
Jonathan from Midtown says:
This is why me and my circle of gay friends are fleeing the Democratic party. I’m not quite sure whose interests they are promoting but it sure isn’t mine. Can we please have some sane leaders? I’m old enough to remember the sting of Clinton throwing us under the bus with DADT and DOMA. I have never trusted a Democrat since. But Glick’s craziness on surrogacy is the icing on the cake. Who needs to worry about Mike Pence when we have Glick achieving his agenda?!
June 20, 5:22 pm
Jordan from Chelsea says:
This is the ultimate betrayal by Deborah Glick and the closet case Helene Weinstein. They have turned their back on the LGBT community that they purport to be a part of and support. Both should be voted out of office.
June 21, 3:27 pm
Justen from Manhattan says:
She's been too comfortable in this position for way too long. FOURTEEN terms. She often runs unopposed. It's time for new leadership. What qualified candidate from the Village/Soho/Lower Manhattan district can be recruited to run against her in next year's primary? There has to be consequences for betraying the Gay community. She has to go.
June 22, 12:02 am
John from LES says:
How many kids are in the NYS fostercare system?
June 22, 10:19 pm

Comments closed.

Classifieds

Schneps Community News Group

Don’t miss out!

Stay in touch with your community. Subscribe to our free newsletter: