CLARE FOGES: It’s disturbing so many stars like Paris are now using surrogates…

As I write this column, I am the size of a beluga whale. It takes me two whole minutes to get out of bed, I’m wearing stretchy pants that look like they’re from Krusty the Clown, I have heartburn, hip pain and ankle pain. I’m in the eighth month of my pregnancy, but it feels like the 80th.

Maybe this is why I read the news about Paris Hilton’s newest baby with an eye roll. Earlier this year she became the mother of a baby boy named Phoenix, carried and delivered by a surrogate mother. Now she’s closing out 2023 with a second baby, a girl named London, carried and delivered by another unnamed woman.

Congratulations of course to Paris and her husband Carter Reum. I’m sure they will give their babies lots of love. But am I the only one who feels uneasy about the fact that more and more celebrities are turning to surrogacy?

It’s as if using a “gestational carrier” instead of your own uterus is just a parenting decision, like whether to go for a jungle theme in the nursery or just paint it yellow. Isn’t it strange how lightly this radical birth control is reported, how horrified we are at the prospect of one woman’s body being rented out to bear another’s child?

Perhaps the most notable example of celebrity surrogate use is Alec and Hilaria Baldwin, who have seven children. Just months after welcoming their fifth child, they had a sixth via surrogate

If surrogacy is the only solution for a woman who physically cannot have a baby, it can be a wonderful thing. Take 50-year-old Martha Lane Fox, who had twins through a surrogate mother in the US seven years ago. In 2004, the British entrepreneur was involved in a car accident that broke 28 bones and shattered her pelvis, leaving her unable to carry a child. How wonderful that she was able to realize her dream of having children.

Since then, a number of celebrities have used surrogates. The list includes Kim Kardashian, Khloe Kardashian, Amber Heard, Priyanka Chopra, Naomi Campbell, Tyra Banks, Rebel Wilson, Elizabeth Banks, Lucy Liu, Ellen Pompeo and Cameron Diaz.

Of course, some of them will have had fertility problems. It doesn’t matter if you have a house in Beverly Hills, trying and failing to have a baby can be devastating. So if they want to have one this way, then all power to them. But – call me cynical – it’s hard to believe that all the celebrities who choose surrogacy have health problems that prevent them from carrying a child. Chrissy Teigen, the wife of singer John Legend, was pregnant with her third child while a surrogate mother carried their fourth child.

Perhaps the most notable example of celebrity surrogate use is Alec and Hilaria Baldwin, who have seven children. Just months after welcoming their fifth child, they had a sixth via surrogate. “This is a beautiful journey with many people working so hard to bring a soul into the world,” says Hilaria.

Helping a woman have a child when she physically cannot do so herself can be wonderfully altruistic. But using another woman’s womb to build your own football team? Disturbing. While most celebrities who go this route cite medical issues, at least one has been honest that convenience was a factor. Actress Lucy Liu said of her decision to use a carrier, “It just seemed like the right option because I was working and I didn’t know when I would be able to stop.”

Now Paris 2023 closes with a second baby, a girl named London, carried and delivered by another unnamed woman

I imagine that the more inconspicuous this arrangement becomes, the more reasons women will find to use a surrogate. Paris Hilton says she had children this way out of fear of childbirth. How long will it take before women decide that not wanting to lose their figure or damage their pelvic floor is reason enough?

The ethics of what might be called “surrogacy of convenience” are troubling. When we look at photos of parents smiling with their precious new baby, it’s easy to forget that somewhere there’s a woman who just gave birth, who has nursing wounds in unnameable places, or is staggering around with a C-section scar—all without the comfort of having a new baby. You might answer that many surrogates do this because they are generous souls who want to help realize a couple’s dream of becoming parents. In some cases this is true. But many will have an overwhelming financial incentive to get through it.

You are not allowed to pay a surrogate in the UK, but you are responsible for covering reasonable costs. Surrogates normally receive between £10,000 and £15,000, according to a report from Surrogacy UK. A typical surrogate in the US, where they can be compensated, is expected to earn £40,000 to £47,000. If you are on a low income and you are offered an astonishing amount of money in exchange for nine months of your life, is that a choice you make freely?

This is my fourth pregnancy and I can now say with some authority that (for me anyway) it sucks.

It’s months of nausea, followed by months of pain, with about two days of “glowing mother-to-be” in the middle. Still, I am very grateful that I was able to experience it. Those long months don’t just change your body; they slow you down, prepare you for the massive change that is coming, make you put someone else first. I really feel sympathy for those women who want to have a baby, but whose bodies don’t allow it. If surrogacy can help, then that’s fine. But let’s not allow it to simply become a shortcut in our convenience-obsessed culture.

Hurrah! Nigella cancels Christmas cake

Nigella Lawson has urged Brits to ditch the traditional Christmas cake and go for chocolate instead.

Finally, someone has broken the taboo by admitting that eating dry old fruitcake is more of a chore than a cheering treat. Everyone knows the best festive cake is a chocolate yule log.

Next in line for the pork chop: those tubs of sticky dates we all have to buy at Christmas, even though no one has eaten them since 1971.

Nigella Lawson has urged Brits to ditch the traditional Christmas cake and go for chocolate instead

This year I have joined the ranks of the unbearable smug and having already packed all my presents and my house decorated before December 1.

All it took was the fact I’m in labor in two weeks’ time to encourage me in action…

Stop this stupid feud, Harry, life is too short

Omid Scobie’s new royal-bashing book, Endgame, appears to be the final nail in the coffin for the relationship between Prince Harry and King Charles. As someone who lost his father at the age of eight, I can’t help but feel that their ongoing feud is a sad waste of time, much like Meghan’s ongoing estrangement from her own father.

Life is short. Christmas is coming. You only have one father, so call and start picking up the pieces.

King Charles, Prince William and Prince Harry attend a ceremony to mark the centenary of the Battle of Vimy Ridge on April 9, 2017

Girls will suffer from Labour’s school tax

Labour’s plan to cut VAT on private education threatens the closure of single-sex schools.

A disgrace. From the age of eleven to sixteen I went to an all-girls school, and I am grateful for that. Without boys around, and the inevitable obsession over who liked whom, we were free to be young, stupid and innocent.

Labour’s plan to cut VAT on private education threatens the closure of single-sex schools (stock photo)