Skip to main content
Springer Nature Link
Log in

Navigating the gestational surrogacy seas: the legalities and complexities of gestational carrier services

  • Assisted Reproduction Technologies
  • Published:
Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper offers a comprehensive review of the gestational surrogacy process in the US, as well as internationally, focusing on the legal and ethical challenges that gestational carriers, intended parents, fertility providers, and OB/GYNs may face. The objective of this review article is to serve as an overview and provide information on legal, cultural, and ethical aspects of the decisions to pursue gestational surrogacy both for intended parents and gestational carriers in the US and globally. By understanding the surrogacy landscape and the obstacles, the surrogacy agencies and other involved parties can improve the surrogacy process to better serve all parties involved.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Explore related subjects

Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.

References

  1. Crockin SL, Edmonds MA, Altman A. Legal principles and essential surrogacy cases every practitioner should know. Fertil Steril. 2020;113(5):908–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2020.03.015.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Postgate JN. Early Mesopotamia: society and economy at the dawn of history, in Early Mesopotamia. London: Routledge; 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Kirby MD. From Hagar to Baby Cotton–surrogacy, ’85. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol. 1985;25(3):151–8. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1479-828x.1985.tb00634.x.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Warrier A. Is blanket ban on commercial surrogacy a well thought out solution?,  The Week, Feb. 06, 2020. Accessed: Nov. 06, 2023. [Online]. Available: https://www.theweek.in/news/health/2020/02/06/is-blanket-ban-on-commercial-surrogacy-a-well-thought-out-solution.html#:~:text=A%20blanket%20ban%20on%20’commercial,doctors%20in%20the%20field%20feel.

  5. Utian WH, Sheean L, Goldfarb JM, Kiwi R. Successful pregnancy after in vitro fertilization and embryo transfer from an infertile woman to a surrogate. N Engl J Med. 1985;313(21):1351–2. https://doi.org/10.1056/nejm198511213132112.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Emmerson G. Surrogacy: born for another. BRISBANE! 1996. Available: https://documents.parliament.qld.gov.au/explore/ResearchPublications/researchBulletins/rb0896ge.pdf. Accessed 17 Oct 2024.

  7. Tsai S, Shaia K, Woodward JT, Sun MY, Muasher SJ. Surrogacy laws in the United States: what obstetrician-gynecologists need to know. Obstet Gynecol. 2020;135(3):717–22. https://doi.org/10.1097/AOG.0000000000003698.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Assisted reproductive technology (ART) data. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. https://nccd.cdc.gov/drh_art/rdPage.aspx?rdReport=DRH_ART.ClinicInfo&rdRequestForward=True&ClinicId=9999&ShowNational=1. Accessed 11/10/2023.

  9. Kim HH. Family building by same-sex male couples via gestational surrogacy. Semin Reprod Med. 2017;35(5):408–14. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0037-1607333.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Jadva V, Gamble N, Prosser H, Imrie S. Parents’ relationship with their surrogate in cross-border and domestic surrogacy arrangements: comparisons by sexual orientation and location. Fertil Steril. 2019;111(3):562–70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2018.11.029.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  11. Kneebone E, Beilby K, Hammarberg K. Experiences of surrogates and intended parents of surrogacy arrangements: a systematic review. Reprod Biomed Onlline. 2022;45(4):815–30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rbmo.2022.06.006.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Swanson K, Ayala NK, Barnes RB, Desai N, Miller M, Yee LM. Understanding gestational surrogacy in the United States: a primer for obstetricians and gynecologists. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2020;222(4):330–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2020.01.037.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Alvare HM. Catholic teaching and the law concerning the new reproductive technologies. Fordham Urban Law J. 2002;30(1):107–34.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Warnock M. Report of inquiry into human fertilisation and embryology: Medical Research Council’s response. Lancet. 1985;1(8423):270.

    Google Scholar 

  15. D’alton-Harrison R. Mater semper incertus est: who’s your mummy? Med Law Rev. 2014;22(3):357–83. https://doi.org/10.1093/medlaw/fwt047.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Ketchum SA. Selling babies and selling bodies. Hypatia 1989;4(3):116–27. http://www.jstor.org/stable/3809829. Accessed 11/12/2023.

  17. Kalantry S. Regulating markets for gestational care: comparative perspectives on surrogacy in the United States and India. Cornell J Law Public Policy. 2018;27(3):685–715.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Hibino Y. The advantages and disadvantages of altruistic and commercial surrogacy in India. Philos Ethics Humanit Med. 2023;18(1):8. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13010-023-00130-y.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  19. Saxena P, Mishra A, Malik S. Surrogacy: ethical and legal issues. Indian J Community Med. 2012;37(4):211. https://doi.org/10.4103/0970-0218.103466.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  20. Ethics Committee of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Electronic address: asrm@asrm.org, Consideration of the gestational carrier: an Ethics Committee opinion., Fertil Steril. 2023;119(4):583–588. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2023.01.015.

  21. Tanderup M, Reddy S, Patel T, Nielsen BB. Reproductive ethics in commercial surrogacy: decision-making in IVF clinics in New Delhi, India. J Bioeth Inq. 2015;12(3):491–501. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11673-015-9642-8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Sachdev C. Once the go-to place for surrogacy, India tightens control over its baby industry. The World. 2018. Available: https://theworld.org/stories/2018/07/02/surrogacy-india. Accessed 17 Oct 2024.

  23. Hibino Y. Non-commercial surrogacy in Thailand: ethical, legal, and social implications in local and global contexts. Asian Bioeth Rev. 2020;12(2):135–47. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41649-020-00126-2.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  24. Abrams FR. Children of choice: freedom and the new reproductive technologies. JAMA: The Journal of the American Medical Association. 1994;272(24):1956. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.1994.03520240084051.

  25. Feiglin J, Savulescu J. A new ethical model of commercial surrogacy arrangements for Australia. J Law Med. 2018;25(4):919–28.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Sifris R. Commercial surrogacy and the human right to autonomy. J Law Med. 2015;23(2):365–77.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Bravennan AM, Corson SL. A comparison of oocyte donors’ and gestational carriers/surrogates’ attitudes towards third party reproduction. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2002;19(10):462–9. https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1020306402235.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Söderström-Anttila V, et al. Surrogacy: outcomes for surrogate mothers, children and the resulting families-a systematic review. Hum Reprod Update. 2016;22(2):260–76. https://doi.org/10.1093/humupd/dmv046.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Patel N, Jadeja Y, Bhadarka H, Patel M, Patel N, Sodagar N. Insight into different aspects of surrogacy practices. J Hum Reprod Sci. 2018;11(3):212. https://doi.org/10.4103/jhrs.JHRS_138_17.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  30. Tong R. Feminist bioethics: toward developing a ‘feminist’ answer to the surrogate motherhood question. Kennedy Inst Ethics J. 1996;6(1):37–52. https://doi.org/10.1353/ken.1996.0004.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Mamo L. Queering reproduction in transnational bio-economies. Reprod Biomed Soc Online. 2018;7:24–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rbms.2018.10.008.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  32. Ethics Committee of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Electronic address: asrm@asrm.org, Cross-border reproductive care: an Ethics Committee opinion., Fertil Steril, 2022;117(5):954–962. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2022.01.012.

  33. Chen N, Song S, Bao X, Zhu L. Update on Mayer—Rokitansky—Küster—Hauser syndrome. Front Med. 2022;16(6):859–72. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11684-022-0969-3.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Yau A, et al. Medical and mental health implications of gestational surrogacy. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2021;225(3):264–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2021.04.213.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Jones BP, et al. Options for acquiring motherhood in absolute uterine factor infertility; adoption, surrogacy and uterine transplantation. Obstet Gynaecol. 2021;23(2):138–47. https://doi.org/10.1111/tog.12729.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  36. ACOG Committee Opinion No. 660: family building through gestational surrogacy. Obstetrics and gynecology. 2016;127(3):e97–e103. https://doi.org/10.1097/AOG.0000000000001352.

  37. Goldberg AE, Downing JB, Moyer AM. Why parenthood, and why now?: Gay men’s motivations for pursuing parenthood. Fam Relat. 2012;61(1):157–74. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3729.2011.00687.x.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  38. Mackenzie SC, Wickins-Drazilova D, Wickins J. The ethics of fertility treatment for same-sex male couples: considerations for a modern fertility clinic. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2020;244:71–5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejogrb.2019.11.011.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Yee S, Mamone AA, Fatima M, Sharon-Weiner M, Librach CL. Parenthood desire, perceived parenthood stigma, and barriers to achieving parenthood in childless sexual minority men. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2024;41(7):1739–53. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-024-03098-6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Kirubarajan A, Patel P, Leung S, Park B, Sierra S. Cultural competence in fertility care for lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer people: a systematic review of patient and provider perspectives. Fertil Steril. 2021;115(5):1294–301. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2020.12.002.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Jacobson H. A limited market: the recruitment of gay men as surrogacy clients by the infertility industry in the USA. Reprod Biomed Soc Online. 2018;7:14–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rbms.2018.10.019.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  42. Quaas AM. Local privileges not universal rights: geographic variations in the science and clinical practice of reproductive medicine. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2018;35(9):1559–63. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-018-1249-7.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  43. Greil AL, McQuillan J, Shreffler KM, Johnson KM, Slauson-Blevins KS. Race-ethnicity and medical services for infertility: stratified reproduction in a population-based sample of U.S. women. J Health Soc Behav. 2011;52(4):493–509. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022146511418236.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. King L, Meyer MH. The politics of reproductive benefits. Gend Soc. 1997;11(1):8–30. https://doi.org/10.1177/089124397011001002.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Luna Z, Luker K. Reproduction and society: interdisciplinary readings. New York. 2015. Available: https://www.routledge.com/Reproduction-and-Society-Interdisciplinary-Readings/Joffe-Reich/p/book/9780415731034?srsltid=AfmBOopnJMC0ciTvNK3wmiZKqWtRXuCwif0NjMTNZAjBRhzlvS3uAY8j. Accessed 17 Oct 2024.

  46. Roberts DE. Killing the black body: race, reproduction, and the meaning of liberty. All Faculty Scholarship. 1997;2776. https://scholarship.law.upenn.edu/faculty_scholarship/2776.

  47. Perkins KM, Boulet SL, Levine AD, Jamieson DJ, Kissin DM. Differences in the utilization of gestational surrogacy between states in the U.S. Reprod Biomed Soc Online. 2018;5:1–4. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rbms.2017.08.002.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Greenfeld DA, Seli E. Gay men choosing parenthood through assisted reproduction: medical and psychosocial considerations. Fertil Steril. 2011;95(1):225–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2010.05.053.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Academy of Adoption & Assisted Reproduction Attorneys. Parentage proceedings. Accessed: Nov. 12, 2023. [Online]. Available: https://adoptionart.org/assisted-reproduction/parentage-proceedings/

  50. Deonandan R. Thoughts on the ethics of gestational surrogacy: perspectives from religions, Western liberalism, and comparisons with adoption. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2020;37(2):269–79. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-019-01647-y.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  51. Haas J. Begotten not made: a Catholic view of reproductive technology. Accessed: Nov. 12, 2023. [Online]. Available: https://www.usccb.org/issues-and-action/human-life-and-dignity/reproductive-technology/begotten-not-made-a-catholic-view-of-reproductive-technology

  52. Vatican Archive. Catechism of the Catholic Church. Accessed: Nov. 12, 2023. [Online]. Available: http://www.scborromeo.org/ccc/para/2377.htm

  53. Lozano AJ. Human cloning and Donum Vitae. Linacre Q. 1999;66(3):79–94. https://doi.org/10.1080/20508549.1999.11877551.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Schenker JG. Assisted reproductive practice: religious perspectives. Reprod Biomed Online. 2005;10(3):310–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1472-6483(10)61789-0.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Serour GI. Bioethics in artificial reproduction in the Muslim world. Bioethics. 1993;7(2–3):207–17. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8519.1993.tb00286.x.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Serour GI. Ethical issues in human reproduction: Islamic perspectives. Gynecol Endocrinol. 2013;29(11):949–52. https://doi.org/10.3109/09513590.2013.825714.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Schenker JG. Assisted reproductive technology: perspectives in Halakha (Jewish religious law). Reprod Biomed Online. 2008;17:17–24. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1472-6483(10)60326-4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Agarwal A. Celebs who opted for surrogacy. Times of India. Accessed: Nov. 12, 2023. [Online]. Available: https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/entertainment/hindi/bollywood/news/celebs-who-opted-for-surrogacy/articleshow/52971925.cms

  59. Jayaraman G. The Baby Factory: surrogacy, the blooming business in Gujarat, India Today. Accessed: Nov. 12, 2023. [Online]. Available: https://www.indiatoday.in/india/story/surrogacy-in-india-gujarat-blooming-industry-174772-2013-08-22

  60. Kasturi CS. India banned commercial surrogacy. Now, parents are flocking to Georgia, a rare nation where it’s legal — and relatively cheap, Business Insider. Accessed: Nov. 12, 2023. [Online]. Available: https://www.businessinsider.com/commercial-surrogacy-in-india-ban-georgia-legal-lisa-ray-2022-6

  61. Finkelstein A, Mac Dougall S, Kinotominas A, Olsen A, Clinic releases report on surrogacy as New York contemplates potential change to state ban, Columbia Law School. Accessed: Nov. 12, 2023. [Online]. Available: https://www.law.columbia.edu/news/archive/clinic-releases-report-surrogacy-new-york-contemplates-potential-change-state-ban

  62. Haberman C. Baby M and the question of surrogate motherhood, The New York Times. Accessed: Nov. 12, 2023. [Online]. Available: https://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/24/us/baby-m-and-the-question-of-surrogate-motherhood.html

  63. “The Child-Parent Security Act: gestational surrogacy agreements, acknowledgment of parentage and orders of parentage,” New York State Department of Health. Accessed: Nov. 12, 2023. [Online]. Available: https://www.health.ny.gov/vital_records/child_parent_security_act/

  64. Hinson DS, Ahern J, Misler M, Gestational surrogacy in the District of Columbia and Maryland, in Handbook of Gestational Surrogacy, Cambridge University Press, 304–313. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781316282618.040.

  65. Nevada Assembly Bill 472, 80th legislature. 2019.

  66. PM, CM. Appellees, v. TB. DB, Appellants. No. 17–0376. 2018.

  67. Gartner v Iowa Department of Public Health. No 12–0243. 2013.

  68. Illinois General Assembly, Illinois Gestational Surrogacy Act. USA: P.A. 93-921, eff. 1-1-05, 2005. Available: https://www.ilga.gov/legislation/ilcs/ilcs3.asp?ActID=2613#:~:text=The%20purpose%20of%20this%20Act,a%20result%20of%20these%20contracts. Accessed 17 Oct 2024.

  69. Gestational Agreement, Utah Code Part 78B-15-8. 2008. Available: https://le.utah.gov/xcode/Title78B/Chapter15/78B-15-P8.html?v=C78B-15-P8_1800010118000101. Accessed 12 Nov 2023.

  70. Bryant J. A baby step: The status of surrogacy law in Wisconsin following Rosecky v. Schissel, 98 Marq. L. Rev. 2015;1729. Available: https://scholarship.law.marquette.edu/mulr/vol98/iss4/8. Accessed 12 Nov 2023.

  71. Relating to the adoption of the Uniform Parentage Act regarding gestational agreements. Texas Legislature Online - 78(R) History for HB 729. 2003. Available: https://capitol.texas.gov/tlodocs/78R/analysis/html/HB00729E.htm. Accessed 12 Nov 2023.

  72. Kindelan K, Bernstein F, Overturning Roe v. Wade raises stakes for patients who need IVF, experts say, Good Morning America. Accessed: Nov. 12, 2023. [Online]. Available: https://www.goodmorningamerica.com/wellness/story/overturning-roe-wade-raises-stakes-patients-ivf-experts-84953101

  73. South Carolina Legislature Online, Reproductive Health Rights Act . South Carolina Legislature, 2022. Accessed: Nov. 12, 2023. [Online]. Available: https://www.scstatehouse.gov/sess124_2021-2022/bills/1348.htm.

  74. Massachusetts. Supreme Judicial Court, Culliton v. Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center., Wests North East Rep, vol. 756, pp. 1133–41, 2001.

  75. W. Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts, R.R. v. M.H. & another.1. 1998. Accessed: Nov. 12, 2023. [Online]. Available: https://caselaw.findlaw.com/court/ma-supreme-judicial-court/1370354.html

  76. Fertility Answers, Louisiana Law affecting same-sex family building - LGBT fertility. Accessed: Nov. 12, 2023. [Online]. Available: https://www.fertilityanswers.com/fertility-treatments/louisiana-law-affecting-same-sex-family-building/

  77. Executive Office of the Governor. Bill Decriminalizing Surrogacy and Protecting IVF. Available: https://www.michigan.gov/whitmer/news/press-releases/2024/04/01/whitmer-signs-billsdecriminalizing-surrogacy-and-protecting-ivf.

  78. Indiana Code, Chapter 1. Surrogate agreements. 2006. Accessed: Nov. 12, 2023. [Online]. Available: https://law.justia.com/codes/indiana/2006/title31/ar20/ch1.html

  79. County of Maricopa, SOOS v. SUPERIOR CT. 1995. Accessed: Nov. 12, 2023. [Online]. Available: https://www.leagle.com/decision/1994652182ariz4701574

  80. Myers Strickland Arizona Adoption & Assisted Reproduction Attorney, Admin. LGBTQ adoption. [Online]. Available: https://arizonaadoptionlaw.com/adoptive-parents/lgbtq-same-sex-adoption/. Accessed 9/9/2024

  81. Report on surrogacy and gestational carrier agreements. 2017.

  82. South Dakota Legislature, Prohibit commercial surrogacy contracts, provide a penalty for facilitating a commercial surrogacy, and establish an interim committee to evaluate surrogacy in the state. Accessed: Nov. 12, 2023. [Online]. Available: https://sdlegislature.gov/Session/Bill/10411

  83. Government of the Netherlands, Legal and illegal aspects of surrogacy. Accessed: Nov. 12, 2023. [Online]. Available: https://www.government.nl/topics/surrogate-mothers/surrogacy-legal-aspects

  84. Medical assistance in human reproduction. 2002. Available: https://www.law-services.gr/surrogacy-proceedings-in-greece/. Accessed 17 Oct 2024.

  85. Papaligoura Z, Papadatou D, Bellali T. Surrogacy: the experience of Greek commissioning women. Women Birth. 2015;28(4):e110–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wombi.2015.07.005.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  86. Raposo VL. The new Portuguese law on surrogacy - the story of how a promising law does not really regulate surrogacy arrangements. JBRA Assist Reprod. 2017;21(3):230–9. https://doi.org/10.5935/1518-0557.20170044.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  87. Mohr S, Koch L. Transforming social contracts: the social and cultural history of IVF in Denmark. Reprod Biomed Soc Online. 2016;2:88–96. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rbms.2016.09.001.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  88. Trachman E. Denmark threatens to deport surrogate-born children. above the law Above the Law. Accessed: Nov. 12, 2023. [Online]. Available: https://abovethelaw.com/2022/02/denmark-threatens-to-deport-surrogate-born-children/

  89. Chaves M. Gestational surrogacy in Portugal and Brazil. in Handbook of Gestational Surrogacy, Cambridge University Press, pp. 225–231. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781316282618.031.

  90. Briggs L. How all politics became reproductive politics: from welfare reform to foreclosure to Trump. Oakland: University of California Press; 2017.

    Google Scholar 

  91. Johnson E. Surrogacy in Switzerland. Vittoria Vita, 2020, Accessed: Nov. 12, 2023. [Online]. Available: https://vittoriavita.com/surrogacy-in-switzerland/

  92. Curtis M. Swiss gays recognized as parents of child. The Local, 2014. Accessed: Nov. 12, 2023. [Online]. Available: https://www.thelocal.ch/20140825/two-swiss-men-recognized-as-parents-of-child/

  93. Courduriès J. At the nation’s doorstep: the fate of children in France born via surrogacy. Reprod Biomed Soc Online. 2018;7:47–54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rbms.2018.11.003.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  94. Alkorta I. Surrogacy in Spain: vindication of the Mater Semper Certa Est Rule. The New Bioethics. 2020;26(4):298–313. https://doi.org/10.1080/20502877.2020.1829288.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  95. Weis C. Situational ethics in a feminist ethnography on commercial surrogacy in Russia: negotiating access and authority when recruiting participants through institutional gatekeepers,” Methodol Innov, pp. 1–10, 2019.

  96. Starza-Allen A. Italy will not recognize intended parent of surrogate-born child, court rules, Bionews, May 13, 2019. Accessed: Nov. 12, 2023. [Online]. Available: https://www.bionews.org.uk/page_142843

  97. Smietana M, Rudrappa S, Weis C. Moral frameworks of commercial surrogacy within the US, India and Russia. Sex Reprod Health Matters. 2021;29(1):1–17. https://doi.org/10.1080/26410397.2021.1878674.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  98. Piersanti V, Consalvo F, Signore F, Del Rio A, Zaami S. Surrogacy and ‘procreative tourism’. What does the future hold from the ethical and legal perspectives? Medicina (B Aires). 2021;57(1):47. https://doi.org/10.3390/medicina57010047.

  99. Momigliano A. These two baby boys are twins, but an Italian court says they aren’t brothers. The Washington Post, 2017. Accessed: Nov. 14, 2023. [Online]. Available: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2017/01/08/these-two-baby-boys-are-twins-but-an-italian-court-says-they-arent-brothers/

  100. Trachman E. Italy takes a grande step forward for LGBT parental rights. Above the Law, 2018. Accessed: Nov. 14, 2023. [Online]. Available: https://abovethelaw.com/2018/05/italy-takes-a-grande-step-forward-for-lgbt-parental-rights/?rf=1

  101. Malmanche H. Relational surrogacies excluded from the French bioethics model: a Euro-American perspective in the light of Marcel Mauss and Louis Dumont. Reprod Biomed Soc Online. 2020;11:24–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rbms.2020.09.001.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  102. Kristinsson S. Legalizing altruistic surrogacy in response to evasive travel? An Icelandic proposal. Reprod Biomed Soc Online. 2016;3:109–19. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rbms.2016.12.003.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  103. Act on Artificial Insemination. Althingi, 1996. Accessed: Nov. 14, 2023. [Online]. Available: http://www.althingi.is/lagas/144b/1996055.html

  104. Quell M. Rights Court OKs Iceland’s denial of parental rights in lesbian adoption case,” Courthouse News Service, 2021. Accessed: Nov. 14, 2023. [Online]. Available: https://www.courthousenews.com/rights-court-oks-icelands-denial-of-parental-rights-in-lesbian-adoption-case/

  105. Hibino Y. Non-commercial surrogacy among close relatives in Vietnam: policy and ethical implications. Hum Fertil. 2019;22(4):273–6. https://doi.org/10.1080/14647273.2018.1461936.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  106. Wong L. Surrogacy in Hong Kong, legally enforceable or not?, CRS. Accessed: Nov. 12, 2023. [Online]. Available: https://www.charlesrussellspeechlys.com/en/news-and-insights/insights/global-markets/2022/surrogacy-in-hong-kong-legally-enforceable-or-not/

  107. Liamzon GMA, Santos AMP, Tamayo MAMG, Ma. Macapagal EJ. Surrogacy among Filipinos who have struggled with infertility: a discourse analysis. J Pacific Rim Psychol. 2021;15:183449092199793. https://doi.org/10.1177/1834490921997933.

  108. Johnson I, Li C, China experiences a booming underground market in surrogate motherhood,” NY Times, 2014. Accessed: Nov. 14, 2023. [Online]. Available: https://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/03/world/asia/china-experiences-a-booming-black-market-in-child-surrogacy.html

  109. Hibino Y. Gestational surrogacy in Japan, in Handbook of Gestational Surrogacy, Cambridge University Press, pp. 174–180. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781316282618.024.

  110. Plante C. Quebec will regulate surrogate mothers in new family law, Montreal Gazette, 2021. Accessed: Nov. 12, 2023. [Online]. Available: https://montrealgazette.com/news/local-news/quebec-will-regulate-surrogate-mothers-in-new-family-law

  111. Torres G, Shapiro A, Mackey TK. A review of surrogate motherhood regulation in south American countries: pointing to a need for an international legal framework. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2019;19(1):46. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12884-019-2182-1.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  112. Schover LR. Cross-border surrogacy: the case of Baby Gammy highlights the need for global agreement on protections for all parties. Fertil Steril. 2014;102(5):1258–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2014.08.017.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  113. Ahmad N, Lilienthal GI, Gestational surrogacy in Malaysia, in Handbook of gestational surrogacy, Cambridge University Press, pp. 196–203. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781316282618.027.

  114. Houghton W, Altamirano L, Surrogacy in Colombia, Sensible for Loving Families. Accessed: Nov. 14, 2023. [Online]. Available: https://www.sensiblesurrogacy.com/surrogacy-in-colombia/

  115. Svitnev K. Legal regulation of assisted reproduction treatment in Russia. Reprod Biomed Online. 2010;20(7):892–4. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rbmo.2010.03.023.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  116. Rumpik D, Rumpikova T, Pohanka M, Ventruba P, Belaskova S. Gestational surrogacy in the Czech Republic. Biomedical Papers. 2019;163(2):155–60. https://doi.org/10.5507/bp.2018.040.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  117. Badaiki W. Georgia, we have a problem: surrogacy and exploitation, Impact Ethics, 2021. Accessed: Nov. 14, 2023. [Online]. Available: https://impactethics.ca/2021/03/26/georgia-we-have-a-problem-surrogacy-and-exploitation/

  118. Kirubarajan A, et al. LGBTQ2S+ childbearing individuals and perinatal mental health: a systematic review. BJOG. 2022;129(10):1630–43. https://doi.org/10.1111/1471-0528.17103.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  119. Swain ME, Rogerson CJ. Addressing legal issues in cross-border gestational surrogacy: current topics and trends. Fertil Steril. 2021;115(2):268–73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2020.11.031.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  120. Practice Committee of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine and Practice Committee of the Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology. Electronic address: asrm@asrm.org, Recommendations for practices using gestational carriers: a committee opinion., Fertil Steril. 2022;118(1):65–74. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2022.05.001.

  121. Horsey K, Mahmoud Z, Surrogates’ and intended parents’ experiences of surrogacy arrangements: a systematic review. 2022, 10.1016/j.

  122. Igreja AR, Ricou M. Surrogacy: challenges and ambiguities. New Bioeth. 2019;25(1):60–77. https://doi.org/10.1080/20502877.2019.1564007.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  123. Horner C, Burcher P. A surrogate’s secrets are(n’t) safe with me: patient confidentiality in the care of a gestational surrogate. J Med Ethics. 2021;47(4):213–7. https://doi.org/10.1136/medethics-2017-104518.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Division of Reproductive Endocrinology and Infertility, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology University Hospitals, Case Western Reserve School of Medicine, Cleveland, OH, USA

    Evelina Manvelyan

  2. Department of Internal Medicine, University of Florida-Jacksonville, Jacksonville, FL, USA

    Abha Rajendra Sathe

  3. Department of Psychiatry, University of Florida-Jacksonville, Jacksonville, FL, USA

    David Paul Lindars

  4. Division of Reproductive Endocrinology and Infertility, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Stanford School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, USA

    Lusine Aghajanova

Authors
  1. Evelina Manvelyan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  2. Abha Rajendra Sathe
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  3. David Paul Lindars
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  4. Lusine Aghajanova
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Evelina Manvelyan.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Manvelyan, E., Sathe, A.R., Lindars, D.P. et al. Navigating the gestational surrogacy seas: the legalities and complexities of gestational carrier services. J Assist Reprod Genet 41, 3013–3037 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-024-03289-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-024-03289-1

Keywords