Surrogacy contracts and the law

Surrogacy implicates several neurobiological systems in ways that distinguish it from other reproductive arrangements. The gestational carrier's pregnancy produces the same hormonal and neural changes that any pregnancy does: oxytocin elevation, progesterone-mediated mood regulation, neuroplastic changes in the regions associated with caregiving. These changes occur regardless of the carrier's relationship to the eventual parent. The intent to relinquish does not override the biology of attachment formation; it requires the carrier to navigate the biology with conscious awareness. For most experienced gestational carriers, the navigation is successful, and most report that the bond formed is more like that of an aunt or close family friend than like that of a mother. For the intended parents, the absence of gestational involvement means they bond with their child through other channels: contact during pregnancy, presence at appointments, attendance at birth, and immediate postnatal caregiving. The pair-bonding circuitry in the intended parents activates around the child rather than around the pregnancy itself, and the activation tends to be robust in arrangements that allow active engagement throughout. Neurobiology is malleable; surrogacy demonstrates that the relationship between gestation and parental bonding is more flexible than older assumptions suggested.

The psychological work of surrogacy is distributed across multiple parties. For the gestational carrier, the central work is maintaining the cognitive frame in which the child being gestated is not her child. Experienced carriers describe explicit psychological practices for maintaining this frame: thinking of the pregnancy as a job they are doing well, communicating with the intended parents in ways that emphasize their parenthood, avoiding rituals (like ultrasound photos kept privately) that would foster bonding. For the intended parents, the work is managing the loss of control inherent in another person's body carrying their child, while building parental identity in advance of physical caregiving. Anxiety in this period is common; clinical literature recommends active engagement rather than withdrawal. For the partnership of intended parents, the work is staying aligned: the non-genetic parent in a same-sex arrangement, or the non-providing parent in a heterosexual arrangement, may experience the asymmetry differently than the other and benefit from explicit attention to their place in the formation of the family.

The arrangement unfolds across roughly two years from initial decision to settled family life. The early phase is selection: matching with an agency or independent carrier, psychological evaluations, medical clearances. The contracting phase typically takes two to four months. The pregnancy phase runs forty weeks. The birth and immediate post-birth phase involves legal parentage establishment, hospital protocols that may or may not be set up for surrogacy births, and the transition to home with the new child. The post-birth phase includes whatever ongoing contact the parties have agreed to maintain, which ranges from none to substantial, and the integration of the child into the family. Each phase has characteristic challenges. Couples that anticipate the phase structure and prepare for each transition tend to navigate the arrangement more smoothly than those that focus only on the immediate phase. The arrangement is a project with a long horizon, and project-management skills — milestone planning, contingency planning, regular communication — turn out to be applicable.

The cultural treatment of surrogacy varies sharply by community. Within LGBTQ communities, especially among gay men, surrogacy has become a normalized route to biological parenthood, with established information networks and increasing intergenerational visibility. Within conservative religious communities, surrogacy is generally opposed, though the lines of opposition differ across traditions. Within some feminist communities, surrogacy is debated rather than settled, with critiques focused on commodification, class asymmetry, and the experience of carriers in international arrangements. Mainstream secular culture has moved toward acceptance, with celebrity surrogacy arrangements now widely reported without scandal. The cultural vocabulary has shifted: gestational carrier has largely replaced surrogate mother in formal usage, reflecting the conceptual distinction between gestation and motherhood that the legal framework now generally adopts. Popular media has begun to include surrogacy as a routine plot element rather than as an exotic premise.

Couples pursuing surrogacy benefit from concrete practices that the agencies do not always emphasize. These include: choosing an agency with strong screening of both intended parents and carriers, since mismatches produce most of the difficulties that arise; engaging counsel in the carrier's state, the intended parents' state, and the state of intended birth; budgeting for contingencies including failed transfers, miscarriages, multiple pregnancy, premature birth, and extended NICU stays; establishing a communication rhythm with the carrier early and maintaining it; attending key prenatal appointments in person when feasible; preparing the hospital where birth will occur, since not all hospitals have protocols for surrogacy births; and arranging in advance for post-birth contact at whatever level the parties agree to maintain. Couples using international surrogacy face additional planning around immigration, citizenship, and the legal recognition of parentage in both the country of birth and the country of intended residence. The practical work is substantial and benefits from project management rather than ad hoc handling.

The relational triangle of surrogacy — intended parents, gestational carrier, often the carrier's family — has its own characteristic dynamics. The healthy pattern involves clear roles, regular communication, mutual respect, and explicit acknowledgment of the unusual nature of the relationship. The unhealthy patterns include intended parents who treat the carrier as a service provider rather than as a person doing meaningful work; carriers who develop expectations of ongoing relationship that the intended parents do not share; and intended parents who under-engage during the pregnancy and then expect the carrier to relinquish without difficulty. Within the intended-parent partnership, the relational work involves staying aligned through the long arrangement, supporting whichever partner has the biological connection without diminishing the role of the other, and presenting a united front to the carrier and to the agency. Therapists specializing in third-party reproduction report that the partnerships that fare best invest in their own relationship through the arrangement rather than letting the project consume the partnership.

The philosophical debates around surrogacy center on commodification, autonomy, and the meaning of parenthood. The commodification critique holds that paying for reproductive labor turns the body into a commercial instrument in ways that undermine human dignity, particularly when the carriers are economically vulnerable. The autonomy response holds that competent adults should be free to enter contracts that use their bodies, and that paternalistic restrictions disrespect women's capacity to make such choices. The parenthood debate concerns whether genetic, gestational, intentional, or social contribution is most central to parental status; legal frameworks have largely converged on intentional parenthood as the operative concept in surrogacy contexts, but the philosophical question remains live. Partnerships pursuing surrogacy benefit from engaging these debates rather than dismissing them, because their own children may eventually engage them and because their treatment of the carrier reflects their stance on the underlying questions whether or not they articulate it.

The first documented surrogacy arrangement in the modern era occurred in 1976; the field grew through the 1980s and reached public consciousness with Baby M in 1988. The shift from traditional surrogacy (carrier genetically related to the child) to gestational surrogacy (carrier not genetically related) occurred largely through the 1990s as IVF made gestational arrangements possible. Susan Markens's sociological history charts the bifurcation of state law that followed Baby M and the political coalitions that produced different state regimes. International surrogacy markets emerged in the 2000s, with India, Thailand, and Ukraine as major destinations at different points, and with subsequent legal contractions in each that have reshaped the global landscape. Historical literacy helps current participants understand why their state's law looks the way it does and how their arrangement fits into a broader trajectory that continues to evolve.

Surrogacy arrangements are shaped by the legal regime in the carrier's state, the intended parents' state, and the state of birth; by insurance coverage, which varies dramatically and is often limited; by the carrier's existing family situation, including her spouse and children; by the intended parents' family situation, including extended family acceptance; by the agency's reputation and screening practices; by the medical complexity of the pregnancy; and by the cultural and religious contexts of all parties. Same-sex male couples face additional contextual considerations around legal parentage in some jurisdictions and around the acceptance of their family form by hospital staff, schools, and extended community. International arrangements add layers of immigration law, foreign legal recognition, and travel logistics. Each arrangement is distinctive, and templates drawn from general experience need adjustment to the specific context.

A surrogacy arrangement integrates the fertility clinic that creates and transfers the embryos, the surrogacy agency that matches and supports the parties, the legal teams on both sides, the obstetric care provider managing the pregnancy, the insurance arrangements, the hospital where birth occurs, the court system that issues the parentage order, and sometimes the immigration authorities. Each system has its own protocols and failure modes, and the arrangement requires coordination across them. Failures of coordination — a hospital that does not have protocols for surrogacy, a court that delays the parentage order, an insurance dispute about coverage — are the most common sources of distress in arrangements that otherwise proceed normally. Building the system-level coordination in advance, through experienced agencies and counsel, is one of the highest-value investments couples can make in the arrangement.

The integration point is that surrogacy is a planning achievement that extends the reach of partnership-level family formation to circumstances that previously foreclosed it. It is also a relational and ethical undertaking that asks the participants to engage seriously with the dignity of the gestational carrier, the welfare of the resulting child, and the broader social implications of the practice. Partnerships that treat the arrangement as both a planning project and a relational and ethical commitment tend to produce outcomes that participants describe positively. Partnerships that treat it as one or the other — pure project or pure relationship — tend to under-serve the dimension they neglect. The collective work, at the level of policy and culture, is to build frameworks that protect carriers, support children, and enable intended parents while engaging the legitimate critiques of the practice rather than dismissing them.

Several developments will shape the next decade of surrogacy practice. Continued state-level liberalization will likely extend access, while continued contraction in some international markets will reshape the global landscape. The rise of telehealth and remote prenatal monitoring will enable intended parents to engage more closely with pregnancies they are not physically near. Artificial-womb research, while still in early stages, raises the long-term prospect of decoupling gestation from a human carrier entirely, which would transform the ethics and economics of the field. Genetic technologies will continue to expand the selection menu, raising questions about what kind of child intended parents are seeking. Same-sex parenthood through surrogacy will continue to mainstream, with cohort effects visible in the children now reaching adolescence in the first large generation of such families. The constant across these developments is that the planning capacity of partnerships — their ability to make consequential decisions together, across long horizons, with multiple stakeholders — will continue to determine outcomes regardless of the technological and legal landscape.

Cahn, Naomi. The New Kinship: Constructing Donor-Conceived Families. New York: New York University Press, 2013.

Cahn, Naomi. Test Tube Families: Why the Fertility Market Needs Legal Regulation. New York: New York University Press, 2009.

Cohen, I. Glenn. Patients with Passports: Medical Tourism, Law, and Ethics. New York: Oxford University Press, 2015.

Cohen, I. Glenn. "Regulating Reproduction: The Problem with Best Interests." Minnesota Law Review 96, no. 2 (2011): 423-519.

Daar, Judith. The New Eugenics: Selective Breeding in an Era of Reproductive Technologies. New Haven: Yale University Press, 2017.

Daar, Judith. Reproductive Technologies and the Law. 2nd ed. New Providence, NJ: LexisNexis, 2013.

Gugucheva, Magdalena. Surrogacy in America. Cambridge, MA: Council for Responsible Genetics, 2010.

Markens, Susan. Surrogate Motherhood and the Politics of Reproduction. Berkeley: University of California Press, 2007.

Markens, Susan. "The Global Reproductive Health Market: U.S. Media Framings and Public Discourses about Transnational Surrogacy." Social Science and Medicine 74, no. 11 (2012): 1745-1753.

Marty, Robin. The New Handbook for a Post-Roe America. New York: Seven Stories Press, 2021.

Rosenthal, Linda. "Surrogacy Law in New York: A Decade of Reform." Albany Law Review 84, no. 3 (2021): 829-872.

Ziegler, Mary. Abortion and the Law in America: Roe v. Wade to the Present. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2020.