Overseas surrogacy has been criticised by the public, specifically by feminist groups arguing that commercial surrogacy is unethical and exploits working-class women.
Why do people pursue overseas surrogacy?
Commercial surrogacy is criticised for being unethical because it establishes a profitable market based on the commodification of women’s bodies. Women being paid for carrying a child can be labelled as a ‘financial incentive’ leading to exploitation, especially if strict regulations aren’t in place. In that case, commercial surrogacy is more desirable because it’s cheaper and legally accessible abroad. For example, surrogacy costs £34,000 in India, whereas in the U.S. it’s £85,000. A country is most likely to become a popular surrogacy destination if it’s cheaper.
However, campaigners allege this is ‘baby shopping’ and argue overseas arrangements are commercial and take place in countries where practices wouldn’t be permitted. As a result, poorer women get taken advantage of and aren’t compensated accordingly.
Lack of protection by the state
Surrogacy Concern argues that checks on commissioning parents and surrogates are less rigorous than in adoption. Three recent cases present evidence of conflict in surrogacy. In each case, the surrogate reportedly opposed either an abortion requested by intended parents or decisions about the babies’ care. The contractual conflict between parents and surrogates has become more prominent, highlighting the fight from surrogates against legal pressure and the harmful nature of the state treating the surrogate-child relationship as disposable.
The physical and emotional bond formed during pregnancy can’t simply be removed by a contract or financial compensation. These cases challenge the notion that surrogates are ‘gestational carriers’. Otherwise, it creates a knock-on effect on the crackdown on overseas commercial surrogacy.
The critique of surrogacy in the U.K.
Although surrogacy is permitted in the UK on an altruistic basis, the law restricts commercial involvement in surrogacy arrangements. Under the Surrogacy Arrangements Act 1985, it is an offence for organisations to commercially arrange, negotiate or facilitate surrogacy arrangements for profit. However, UK law doesn’t prevent British intended parents from pursuing surrogacy abroad, including commercial surrogacy where it’s lawful in the country concerned. Following an overseas surrogacy arrangement, intended parents may apply for a Parental Order in the UK, subject to meeting the statutory requirements, to transfer legal parenthood.
Over the past 10 years, more than half of U.K. parents have sought surrogacy abroad. Additionally, more than 1,500 applications for UK parental orders involved babies born to overseas surrogates between 2018 and 2024, with annual applications more than doubling over that period. Single men make up the majority of these applications. This demonstrates that U.K. citizens are most likely to seek overseas surrogacy compared to other European countries. This is not only due to legal accessibility but also the decline in available surrogates in the UK. Paul Gittins said,
“Britons go abroad because it’s commercial surrogacy, and therefore quicker – you are paying for the service,”
at the Families Through Surrogacy (FTS) conference.
The Department of Health and Social Care have acknowledged that surrogacy is complex and sensitive and stressed the need to prevent exploitation. For example, two British women in their sixties paid £120,000 to Ukrainian surrogates through a clinic in Cyprus. They obtained their adoption orders after a four-year legal battle. The High Court criticised this as commercially exploitative.
Campaigners had hoped for a surrogacy reform, but the change in government in 2024 has stalled progress. Kim Cotton was the first UK surrogate, and she feared that looser laws could exploit financially vulnerable women. Cotton said,
“We don’t want people doing it for the wrong reasons…oh that might be a great way of earning money.”
Advocates stress that surrogacy should remain primarily altruistic rather than financially motivated. They praise Italy’s 2024 criminalisation of surrogacy abroad, as well as France’s opposition. They call for the UK to follow their £800,000 fine plus 2-year prison sentence. These types of sanctions are believed to streamline UK surrogacy laws under altruistic conditions.
The influence of the U.S.
Commercial surrogacy is banned in Europe, compared to the US, they’ve established a financial market. The US surrogacy industry is rapidly growing, with an expected worth of around $190 billion by 2035. In market value, standard processes range from $60,000 to over $200,000 per child (depending on agency and medical fees), with gestational surrogacy comprising 90% of all arrangements, being the most dominant segment.
The US being the leading destination is a positive, as arrangements are safer and more legal compared to abroad. However, based on these statistics, it shows US surrogacy increasingly attracts wealthy clients, specifically ultra-high-net-worth parents. In 2024, 11,821 embryos were transferred to surrogates, compared with 8,461 in 2021. They can afford extensive legal measures and logistical and medical support. However, most intended parents don’t have access to these resources or this level of wealth, resorting to seeking less extensive surrogacy elsewhere. For example, in the US, intended parents often establish legal parentage from birth through pre-birth orders, whereas countries like the UK and Australia require legal processes after birth, leading to long legal battles. For example, after a 3-year legal battle, Trent and Brad were the first same-sex couple in Western Australia to have surrogacy approved after successfully challenging laws they argued were discriminatory against gay men.
Overall, what are campaigners fighting for?
Campaigners and feminist groups argue for stricter surrogacy laws. Compared to adoption, the leniency of pursuing overseas surrogacy can lead to the exploitation of women, specifically working-class women, creating a global, profitable market, the US is a clear example of this. If foreign policies and laws can prioritise surrogacy laws to be safer and consider the legal pressures on both surrogate mothers and legal parents, it’ll relatively reduce exploitative surrogacy arrangements.
