Sign up for the Dr. Phil Newsletter
Twitter Facebook YouTube

2010 Shows

 
She’s been called a criminal, a kidnapper and a thief. Surrogate mom Shelly Baker returns to Dr. Phil’s stage to face her critics and set the record straight about her controversial decision to keep the twins she carried for intended parents, Scott and Amy Kehoe. Shelly says she was surprised by the backlash she received on the message boards and Dr. Phil’s blog, and maintains that she was only protecting the children from Amy, who allegedly withheld the fact that she has a mental illness. Joining the surrogate mother is CBS legal analyst Lisa Bloom, who believes Shelly is within her rights to keep the twins. Then, several opinionated audience members weigh in. Plus, a woman who was a surrogate five times has some strong words for Shelly. And, Bill Handel, attorney and director of the Center for Surrogate Parenting, the largest and oldest surrogacy agency in the country, joins the show. Find out what he thinks of Shelly's decision. It’s an explosive Dr. Phil you don’t want to miss!

Find out what happened on the show.
Comments
Replied By: gavelle on May 12, 2013, 2:53AM
I just watched the show. I know it was a while ago when it was aired but feel I cant contain this comment. I have had a hysterctomy at a young age due to medical emergency. After seeing this is makes me outraged as this could happen to anyone or me if I decide to have a surrogate. She shouldve done her research prior to the agreement. You put all that time, money and hope into have chirldren just for the mother to change her mind. Yes I know she carried the chirldren but then she should have done a full refund and appologize. I think she should not surrogate anymore she sees it as a high/rush Its not what its about. Its not about the money etc. Its about giving a life to those who cannot make one. Its a very noble and kind thing. Its not like. I dont know why Shelly became a surrogate but I think she shouldve learned how to do it right such as doing your homework making up a contract realizing you cant USE them at 3 am to get Taco Bell. And to anyone thinking about getting a surrogate please see a Lawyer and draw up a contract with the surrogate present and in the contract make a note if the Surrogate changes her mind then she owes the family every last cent that she spent with thier money.
 
Replied By: paulab12 on Nov 7, 2012, 1:17PM
Why are people saying the surrogate mother has no rights to the children?  The courts decided that the children should be with the couple.  They are legally the parents of these two babies not the potential couple who lied about drugs drink and a disease similar to paranoid schizophrenia.  Should she have found out about these problems  before she got pregnant (and the babies are not biologically linked to either couple) yes?  Do I think the other couple should have the babies NO!!!!!
 
Replied By: cherryanna on Sep 22, 2012, 12:38PM - In reply to willoraven
Then why is she acting as if those babies are strays that she found on the street and belong to no one? That statement was the dumbest she uttered on that show!! It made her look as if she never intended to give the parents their children.
 
Replied By: cherryanna on Sep 22, 2012, 12:34PM - In reply to willoraven
You agree with Shelley that the twins are not puppies. Okay, then why is she acting like it? She was a surrogate and has no right to those babies. So why is she keeping them like they're strays that she FOUND on the street? That statement was one of the dumbest things she utterred that day because honestly, it makes her sound as if she NEVER intended to give the parents their children. If she was so interested in the mental health of the parents and the safety of the child she agreed to carry, then why did she not investigate BEFORE going through with the procedure to be a surrogate? The way I see it she wanted the gender she never could seem to have herself.
 
Replied By: janshop1 on Jun 15, 2012, 11:00AM


Is Dr Phi going to have an updated new 3rd show on this?  "What's happened since?" They should have Amy Kehoe and Scott Kehoe  on this time.
 
Replied By: dratenti on Nov 30, 2010, 10:29PM
I am rarely angered to such a degree that I post a comment about it. These people make me so angry, how dare they. We should all listen to her comments more closely. They wrote their own names on the birth certificate, they had no intention of allowing the intended parents to have these twins. They are horrible, horrible poeple, I cannot find the words to truely convey my thoughts regarding these people. Shelly also said that she wasnt taking the children back because Amy had a mental disorder, but because Amy (allegedly) did not advise her of her mental illness before they made their agreement, for aguements sake we will believe this, that means that Shelly is using these children to punish Amy for not fully disclosing, who are you to punish Amy and her husband AND the twins. The children will know about this and blame them for it. This is just outrageous, to take someones children away, the intended parents would have been dreaming about holding their twins for 40 weeks. What about Shelly saying "It's a hoot" nothing at all was made of that. My heart goes out to Amy and her husband, she is obviously in control of her mental illness as this would definately cause me to break down, I cant imagine someone taking my son from me. I cant list the things I would do to get him back.
 
Replied By: craigrl on Nov 30, 2010, 9:53PM
Hmmmm, choices choices... In the blue corner we have a couple who withheld drug and alcohol history/convictions as well as past mental history. In the red corner we have Shelly...a woman who has helped other families for no financial gain (ie - big heart).

Ah stuff it...lets just throw the kids to the blue corner and hope for the best.

If I was one of those kids and looked at both corners...I would choose the red because I KNOW the chances of me being loved, protected and looked after are a LOT higher.

Im a mum of 2 children (one being a 8 week newborn) and I raise my hat at Shelly for doing exactly what I would...protecting the children from the odds. Not just the mental health issue (which by itself is manageable)...but the drugs and alcohol!!
 
Replied By: luchto on Nov 30, 2010, 7:14PM
I wonder if Shelly is the one with a mental health issue or if they are just criminals wanting someone else to pay for their babies. Shelly is so self absorbed and so focused on Shelly, what a horrible person she is to do this to the family who paid her to help them have a family. I particularly love how little Shelly doesnt think that she needs to reimburse them their money due to so called 'deception'. Shelly, you and your husband are Charlatans, you should be held accountable for fraud.
 
Replied By: justicewins on Jul 15, 2010, 12:59PM
I believe that once she found out that they were twins and one was a boy is when she  made the decision to keep those babies. Yes, they had already been surrogates for other people but those babies were girls. And they wanted a boy, so yes, it was easy for them to give those children up. But this was the jackpot for them and they stole it. I believe had it been just the girl they would have easily given her to those parents. I myself had been diagnosed with manic depression when I was a child.  They gave me medicine which I stopped taking when I was young. I made the choice to not live my days in a depression and make something out of myself, and I have done quite well. I have never been in any kind of trouble or anything. No problems. I am a single mother of a son, and I'm always being complimented on how I am such a good mother and how happy my baby always is. I love my child with everything in me and the only thing that could even bring me close to getting knocked off my rocker is if someone or something harmed my baby. Since I've had my child life has gotten even better. So for that thief to use that woman's past mental history to cover up her crime is wrong. She is no better than them, especially as heartless as she is . On top of her stealing their children, she wants to steal their money too. Using the "they are not puppies" excuse. That really irritates me because she is a surrogate, in the business of getting pregnant and giving babies away. I do recall that usually is what people do with their dogs and puppies.   Business is business and they only used that money because she was supposed to carry their children and give them to them. In most businesses when a consumer is unsatisfied with the service or do not get what they were promised and what was part of the deal, then they are entitled to a refund. How in the world she thinks it's okay to keep the babies and the money is beyond me. Honestly, I think that idiot is the one who needs to be mentally evaluated!!!
 
Replied By: whitepointer on Jun 29, 2010, 3:44AM
Have just watched the show on the surrogate mother who took that couple to court so she could
use the womans mental illness as an excuse to get the twins. I am absolutely livid and cant adequately put into words how I feel about the woman and her motives. My view is that she used
the womans mental illness as a soft target excuse to get the babies. I was also appalled by Lisa
the attorney who may as well have said that "all mentally ill people should be locked up". The pair of them dont have any experience in mental health at all, but had plenty to say. Well I am going to
have my say because I have experience. I think what really riled me up is the fact that my mother had paranoid schzophrenia and we were loved and looked after to the best of her ability.  I would rather have had that upbringing than being in a home where domestic abuse, alchohol or drug dependency were an issue. Society gives these people a chance to prove themselves as being fit parents but a different
draconian view is taken of the mentally ill. I agree with Dr. Phils comments that half the worlds
children would be off in a  bus if a parents sanity was taken into account. I am fairly disgusted and wanted the throw up watching that woman.
 
Showing 1-10 of total 948 Comments