Surrogacy and Disability: An Overview of the Legal, Regulatory, and Ethical Issues
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.35295/osls.iisl.2383Keywords:
Assisted reproductive technology; surrogacy; disability; human rights law.Abstract
This article examines the intersection of surrogacy and disability rights, highlighting its significance in sociolegal studies due to implications for reproductive justice and human rights. The commodification of surrogacy, particularly in the context of ableism, raises ethical and legal concerns for marginalized populations, including persons with disabilities. Despite existing literature, gaps remain regarding the impact of surrogacy on children with disabilities and the legal framework governing these practices. This article conducts a scoping literature review to analyze these issues, revealing a lack of comprehensive legal protection for surrogate mothers and children with disabilities. The findings emphasize the need for clearer legal frameworks and international consensus to safeguard the rights of all parties involved. Ultimately, the article advocates for a more inclusive approach to surrogacy that prioritizes the rights and dignity of persons with disabilities, contributing to the discourse of human rights and social justice in reproductive technologies.
Downloads
Metrics
Global Statistics ℹ️
|
74
Views
|
36
Downloads
|
|
110
Total
|
|
References
Africawala, A., and Kapadia, S., 2019. Women’s control over decision to participate in surrogacy: experiences of surrogate mothers in Gujarat. Journal of Bioethical Inquiry [online], 16(4), 501-514. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11673-019-09931-3 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11673-019-09931-3
Ahmed, S., 2010. Killing joy: Feminism and the history of happiness. Journal of Women in Culture and Society [online], 35(3), 571-594. Available at: https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/10.1086/648513 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1086/648513
Alimashariyanto, M., Sarib, S., and Mokodenseho, S., 2022. The role of parents in parenting from Islamic law perspectives: a study of muslim families in Ambang II Village. Journal Studi Keislaman [online], 9(1), 38-59. Available at: https://doi.org/10.33650/at-turas.v9i1.3707 DOI: https://doi.org/10.33650/at-turas.v9i1.3707
Armstrong, S., 2021. Surrogacy: time we recognized it as a job? Journal of Gender Studies [online], 30(7), 864-867. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1080/09589236.2021.1915754 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09589236.2021.1915754
Arvidsson, A., Johnsdotter, S., and Essén, B., 2015. Views of Swedish commissioning parents relating to the exploitation discourse in using transnational surrogacy. PLoS ONE [online], 10(5), 1-12. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0126518 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0126518
Attawet, J., Alsharaydeh, E., and Brady, M., 2024. Commercial surrogacy: Landscapes of empowerment or oppression explored through integrative review. Health Care for Women International [online], 1(1), 1-19. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1080/07399332.2024.2303520 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/07399332.2024.2303520
Aznar, J., and Tudela, J., 2019. Gestational surrogacy: ethical aspects. Medicina y Ética [online], 30(3), 767-787. Available at: http://www.scielo.org.mx/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S2594-21662019000300745&lng=es&tlng=en
Ballantyne, A., 2014. Exploitation in cross-border reproductive care. International Journal of Feminist Approaches to Bioethics [online], 7(2), 75-99. Available at: https://utppublishing.com/doi/10.3138/ijfab.7.2.0075 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3138/ijfab.7.2.0075
Bashiri, A., Cherlow, Y., and Kresch-Jaffe, T., 2024. Surrogacy: an important pathway to parenthood. A call for international standardization. Journal of Reproductive Immunology [online], 163(1), 1-12. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jri.2024.104247 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jri.2024.104247
Bashmakova, N.V., Polyakova, I.G., and Ryabko, E.V., 2023. Recent developments in providing medical insurance for reproductive health: global and national trends. Russian Journal of Human Reproduction [online], 29(5), 37‑44. Available at: https://doi.org/10.17116/repro20232905137 DOI: https://doi.org/10.17116/repro20232905137
Bergman, K., et al., 2010. Gay men who become fathers via surrogacy: the transition to parenthood. Journal of GLBT Family Studies [online], 6(2), 111-141. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1080/15504281003704942 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/15504281003704942
Berthonnet, I., and Clos, C., 2024. Compensating a contested labour: the price of commercial surrogacy in the United States. Economy and Society [online], 53(4), 701-718. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1080/03085147.2024.2398948 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/03085147.2024.2398948
Blake, L., et al., 2017. Gay fathers’ motivations for and feelings about surrogacy as a path to parenthood. Human Reproduction [online], 32(4), 860-867. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/dex026 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/dex026
Bora, D., 2024. Surrogacy Market Size, Share & Trends Analysis Report. India: Straits Research [online]. Available at: https://straitsresearch.com/report/surrogacy-market
Bourdieu, P., 1979. Symbolic Power. Sage Journals [online], 4(13-14), 77-98. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1177/0308275X7900401307 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0308275X7900401307
Bourdieu, P., 1985. Social Space and the Genesis of Groups. Theory and Society [online], 14(6), 723-744. Available at: http://www.jstor.org/stable/657373 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00174048
Bourdieu, P., 1986. The forms of capital [online]. In: J.G. Richardson, ed., Handbook of theory and research for the sociology of education [online]. New York: WesPort Conn, 241-258. Available at: https://www.ucg.ac.me/skladiste/blog_9155/objava_66783/fajlovi/Bourdieu%20The%20Forms%20of%20Capital%20_1_.pdf
Bourdieu, P., 1996. Distinction. A social critique of the judgement of taste [online]. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. (Originally published in 1979. Trans.: R. Nice). Available at: https://monoskop.org/images/e/e0/Pierre_Bourdieu_Distinction_A_Social_Critique_of_the_Judgement_of_Taste_1984.pdf
Bourdieu, P., 2007. El sentido práctico [online]. Buenos Aires : Siglo Veintiuno. (Originally published in 1980. Trans.: A. Dilon). Available at: https://www.smujerescoahuila.gob.mx/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/Bordieu%20-%20El%20sentido%20pr%C3%A1ctico-3_compressed.pdf
Brandão, P., and Garrido, N., 2022. Commercial Surrogacy: An Overview. Revista Brasileira de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia [online], 44(12), 1141-1158. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0042-1759774 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0042-1759774
Bulletti. F., et al., 2023. Transmission of human life with a gestational carrier. Journal of Scientific & Technical Research [online], 52(2), 43569-43589. Available at: https://dx.doi.org/10.26717/BJSTR.2023.52.008227 DOI: https://doi.org/10.26717/BJSTR.2023.52.008227
Butler, J., 2006. Gender trouble: Feminism and the subversion of gender. New York/London: Routledge.
Caballero Pérez, A., and Guzmán Rincón, A.M., 2021. The Inter-American System for the Protection of Human Rights and Persons with Disabilities: challenges and perspectives beyond the nondiscrimination rule. Jurídicas [online], 18(2), 43-60. Available at: https://doi.org/10.17151/jurid.2021.18.2.4 DOI: https://doi.org/10.17151/jurid.2021.18.2.4
Caballero-Pérez, A., 2020. Disability and the “art” of interpretation: Case at the Inter-American Court of Human Rights in the Gonzales Lluy et al. v. Ecuador [online]. Madrid: Scholars’ Press. Available at: https://cris.maastrichtuniversity.nl/ws/portalfiles/portal/78091936/978_613_8_93287_1_1_Disability_and_the_art.pdf
Caballero-Pérez, A., 2022. Building up a constructive relationship between law and the social sciences to investigate the “CRPD-in-action”: experiences from a descriptive study of disabled people’s right to vote. Oñati Socio-Legal Series [online], 12(6). Available at: https://doi.org/10.35295/osls.iisl/0000-0000-0000-1358 DOI: https://doi.org/10.35295/osls.iisl/0000-0000-0000-1358
Caballero-Pérez, A., 2023. Voting Matters: An Analysis of the Use of Electoral-Assistive Devices through the Lens of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities [online]. Maastricht: ProefschriftMaken. Available at: https://www.globalacademicpress.com/ebooks/adriana_caballero_p%c3%a9rez/
Capella, V.B., 2015. ¿Nuevas tecnologías? Viejas explotaciones. El caso de la maternidad subrogada internacional. Revista de Filosofía [online], 11(1), 19-52. Available at: https://doi.org/10.46583/scio_2015.11.612 DOI: https://doi.org/10.46583/scio_2015.11.612
Carone, N., Baiocco, R., and Lingiardi, V., 2017. Italian gay fathers’ experiences of transnational surrogacy and their relationship with the surrogate pre- and post-birth. Reproductive BioMedicine Online [online], 34(2), 181-190. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rbmo.2016.10.010 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rbmo.2016.10.010
Carrio Sampedro, A., ed., 2021. Gestación por sustitución: Análisis crítico y propuesta de regulación [online]. 1st ed. Madrid: Marcial Pons. Available at: https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv2zp4xmz DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv2zp4xmz
Cecatiello, A., 2025. Surrogacy in Italy: a “Universal Crime” [online]. 2 January. Union Internationale des Avocats. Available at: https://www.uianet.org/fr/actualites/surrogacy-italy-universal-crime
Cohen, E., 2013. Surrogate offered $10,000 to abort baby. CNN [online], 4 March. Available at: https://edition.cnn.com/2013/03/04/health/surrogacy-kelley-legal-battle
Conde, A., et al., 2024. Surrogacy in Portugal: drawing insights from international practices. Revista Jurídica Portucalense [online], 35(1), 175-191. Available at: https://doi.org/10.34625/issn.2183-2705(35)2024.ic-09
Courduriès, J., 2018. At the nation’s doorstep: the fate of children in France born via surrogacy. Reproductive Biomedicine & Society Online [online], 7(1), 47-54. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rbms.2018.11.003 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rbms.2018.11.003
Crockin, S., Edmonds, M., and Altman, A., 2020. Legal principles and essential surrogacy cases every practitioner should know. Fertility and Sterility [online], 113(5), 908-915. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2020.03.015 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2020.03.015
Danna, D., 2018. The Italian debate on civil unions and same-sex parenthood: the disappearance of lesbians, lesbian mothers, and mothers. Italian Sociological Review [online], 8(2), 285-308. Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.13136/isr.v8i2.238
De Michele, S., and Paternoster, T., 2024. Italy criminalises surrogacy abroad with new law, sparking controversy. EuroNews [online], 17 October. Available at: https://www.euronews.com/my-europe/2024/10/17/italy-criminalises-surrogacy-abroad-with-new-law-sparking-controversy
Deomampo, D., 2013. Transnational surrogacy in India: interrogating power and women’s agency. Frontiers: A Journal of Women’s Studies [online], 34(3), 167-257. Available at: https://doi.org/10.5250/fronjwomestud.34.3.0167 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5250/fronjwomestud.34.3.0167
Ding, C., 2015. Surrogacy litigation in China and beyond. Journal of Law and the Biosciences [online], 2(1), 33-55. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1093/jlb/lsu036 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/jlb/lsu036
Do Ceu-Patrão-Neves, M., 2022. Legal initiative for Gestational Surrogacy in Portugal: An overview of the legal, regulatory, and ethical issues. Revista de Bioética y Derecho [online], 56(1), 55-74. Available at: https://scielo.isciii.es/scielo.php?pid=S1886-58872022000300004&script=sci_abstract&tlng=en DOI: https://doi.org/10.1344/rbd2022.56.39614
Ebrahimi., A., and Ghodrati, F., 2023. Comparative investigation of surrogacy laws in Asia Islamic countries: a narrative review. Journal of Midwifery & Reproductive Health [online], 13(1), 4523-4535. Available at: https://doi.org/10.22038/jmrh.2024.70669.2080
Edgerton, J.D., and Roberts, L., 2014. Cultural capital or habitus? Bourdieu and beyond in the explanation of enduring educational inequality. Theory and Research in Education [online], 12(2), 193-220. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1177/1477878514530231 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1477878514530231
Ellenbogen, A., Feldberg, D., and Lokshin, V., 2021. Surrogacy -a worldwide demand. Implementation and ethical considerations. GREM Gynecological and Reproductive Endocrinology & Metabolism [online], 2(2), 66-73. Available at: https://doi.org/10.53260/GREM.212021
Espejo-Yaksic, N., Fenton-Glynn, C., and Scherpe, J., 2023. Surrogacy in Latin America. Cambridge: Intersentia. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781839703812
Farnós-Amorós, E., 2019. Los acuerdos de gestación por sustitución: análisis a partir de una propuesta de regulación. In: A. Lucas Esteve, ed., La gestación por sustitución. Valencia: Tirant lo Blanch, 119-141.
Farnós-Amorós, E., 2020. Entre prohibir y permitir ¿qué es más feminista? Un análisis de la gestación por sustitución desde la perspectiva de las mujeres gestantes. In: P. Moreda Benavente, ed., Mujeres y derechos. Una discusión jurídica sobre reproducción, sexualidad y género. Madrid: Marcial Pons, 95-134. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv1grb9b0.6
Fiala-Butora, J., 2018. Article 23. Respect for home and the family. In: I. Bantekas, M. Ashley Stein and D. Anastasiou, eds., The UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. A Commentary [online]. Oxford University Press, 629-655. Available at: https://library.oapen.org/handle/20.500.12657/48873 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/law/9780198810667.003.0024
Fixmer-Oraiz, N., 2013. Speaking of solidarity: transnational gestational surrogacy and the rhetorics of reproductive (in)justice. Frontiers: A Journal of Women’s Studies [online], 34(3), 126-257. Available at: https://doi.org/10.5250/fronjwomestud.34.3.0126 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5250/fronjwomestud.34.3.0126
Førde, K.E., 2017. Intimate Distance: Transnational Commercial Surrogacy in India. PhD Thesis. University of Oslo.
Frati, P., et al., 2021. Bioethical issues and legal frameworks of surrogacy: a global perspective about the right to health and dignity. European Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Reproductive Biology [online], 258(1), 1-8. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejogrb.2020.12.020 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejogrb.2020.12.020
Ghodrati, F., 2023. A comparative study of surrogacy rights in Iran and European countries, a review article. Ethics, Medicine and Public Health [online], 27(1), 1-10. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jemep.2023.100880 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jemep.2023.100880
Gilbert, S.F., 2000. Developmental Biology [online]. 6th ed. Sunderland: Sinauer Associates. Available at: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK10008/
Golombok, S., et al., 2017. Parenting and the adjustment of children born to gay fathers through surrogacy. Child Development [online], 89(4), 1223-1233. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.12728 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.12728
González, A., 2019. Commercial surrogacy in the United States [online]. The Georgetown Journal of Gender and the Law [online], 21(1), 1-6. Available at: https://www.law.georgetown.edu/gender-journal/online/volume-xxi-online/commercial-surrogacy-in-the-united-states/
Green, R., et al., 2019. Gay fathers by surrogacy: prejudice, parenting, and well-being of female and male children. Psychology of Sexual Orientation and Gender Diversity, 6(3), 269-283. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1037/sgd0000325 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/sgd0000325
Greenfeld, D., and Seli, E., 2011. Gay men choosing parenthood through assisted reproduction: medical and psychosocial considerations. Psychological Factors [online], 95(1), 225-229. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2010.05.053 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2010.05.053
Gunnarsson-Payne, J., and Handelsman-Nielsen, M., 2023. The surrogacy question, unresolved: surrogacy policy debate as a hegemonic struggle over rights. Critical Policy Studies [online], 17(3), 372–389. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1080/19460171.2022.2105736 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/19460171.2022.2105736
Hatch Fertility, 2025. The best companies for surrogacy benefits in 2025 [online]. 21 January. Available at: https://www.hatch.us/en/blog/best-companies-offering-surrogacy-benefits
Hayward, K., 2014. It’s a miracle. In: G. Filax and D. Taylor, eds., Disabled mothers. Bradford: Demeter Press, 71-86.
Herweck, A., et al., 2024. International gestational surrogacy in the United States, 2014-2020. Fertility and Sterility [online], 121(4), 622-630. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2023.12.039 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2023.12.039
Hibino, Y., 2020. Non-commercial surrogacy in Thailand: ethical, legal, and social implications in local and global contexts. Asian Bioethics Review [online], 12(2), 135-147. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1007/s41649-020-00126-2. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s41649-020-00126-2
Hilgers, M., and Mangez, É., 2015. Burdieu’s Theory of Social Fields: concepts and applications [online]. Boston: Routledge. Available at: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315772493 DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315772493
Hodson, N., Townley, L., and Earp, B.D., 2019. Removing harmful options: the law and ethics of international commercial surrogacy. Medical Law Review [online], 27(4), 597-622. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1093/medlaw/fwz025 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/medlaw/fwz025
Holmstrom-Smith, A., 2021. Free market feminism: re-reconsidering surrogacy. Journal of Law and Social Change [online], 24(3), 443-484. Available at: https://scholarship.law.upenn.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1261&context=jlasc
Horsey, K., 2024. The future of surrogacy: a review of current global trends and national landscapes. Reproductive BioMedicine Online [online], 48(5), 1-16. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rbmo.2023.103764 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rbmo.2023.103764
Horsey, K., and Neofytou, K., 2015. The fertility treatment time forgot: What should be done about surrogacy in the UK?. In: K. Horsey, ed., Revisiting the regulation of human fertilization and embryology. London: Routledge, 117-133. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315767895-8
Horsey, K., et al., 2022. First clinical report of 179 surrogacy cases in the UK: implications for policy and practice. Reproductive BioMedicine Online [online], 45(4), 831-838. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rbmo.2022.05.027 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rbmo.2022.05.027
Igareda González, N., 2019. Regulating surrogacy in Europe: common problems, diverse national laws. European Journal of Women’s Studies [online], 26(4), 435-446. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1177/1350506819835242 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1350506819835242
Igareda González, N., 2020a. La gestación por sustitución en el Reino Unido: una oportunidad para el debate de su regulación en España. Política y Sociedad [online], 57(3), 887-901. Available at: https://doi.org/10.5209/poso.69840 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5209/poso.69840
Igareda González, N., 2020b. Legal and ethical issues in cross-border gestational surrogacy. Fertility and Sterility [online], 113(5), 916-919. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2020.03.003 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2020.03.003
Ishii, T., 2017. Reproductive medicine involving genome editing: clinical uncertainties and embryological needs. Reproductive BioMedicine Online [online], 34(1), 27-31. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rbmo.2016.09.009 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rbmo.2016.09.009
Jacobson, H., and Rozée, V., 2022. Inequalities in (trans)national surrogacy: a call for examining complex lived realities with an empirical lens. International Journal of Comparative Sociology [online], 63(5-6), 285-303. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1177/00207152221098336 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/00207152221098336
Jóhannsdóttir, Á., Egilson, S.T., and Haraldsdóttir, F., 2022. Implications of internalised ableism for the health and wellbeing of disabled young people. Sociology of Health and Illness [online], 44(2), 360-376. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9566.13425 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9566.13425
Kattari, S.K., 2020. Ableist Microagressions and the Mental Health of Disabled Adults. Community Mental Health Journal [online], 56(6), 1170-1179. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10597-020-00615-6 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10597-020-00615-6
Klinkhammer, F., 2019. Germany: a judicial perspective. In: J.M. Scherpe, C. Fenton-Glynn, and T. Kaan, eds., Eastern and Western Perspectives on Surrogacy. Cambridge: Intersentia, 49-58. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781780688633.006
Kneebone, E., Beilby, K., and Hammarberg, K., 2022. Experiences of surrogates and intended parents of surrogacy arrangements: a systematic review. Reproductive BioMedicine Online [online], 45(4), 815-830. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rbmo.2022.06.006 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rbmo.2022.06.006
Król, A., 2024. Stratified reproduction and ableism: Women with disabilities and navigating reproduction and social control in Poland. European Journal of Women’s Studies [online], 31(2), 246-261. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1177/13505068241262122 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/13505068241262122
Kumari, R., 2012. Surrogate motherhood ethical or commercial? [online] New Delhi: Centre for Social Research. Available at: https://archive.nyu.edu/bitstream/2451/34217/2/Surrogacy-Motherhood-Ethical-or-Commercial-Delhi%26Mumbai.pdf
Landsdown, G., 2022. Article 23. The Rights of Children with Disabilities. In: Z. Vaghri et al., eds., Monitoring State Compliance with the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, Children’s Well-Being [online]. Cham: Springer, 193-203. Available at: https://library.oapen.org/handle/20.500.12657/52405 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-84647-3_21
Lee, J.Y., 2022. Surrogacy: beyond the commercial/altruistic distinction. Journal of Medical Ethics [online], 49(1), 196-199. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1136/medethics-2021-108093 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/medethics-2021-108093
Lemmens, K., 2024. Cross-border surrogacy and the European Convention on Human Rights: The Strasbourg Court caught between “fait accompli”, “ordre public”, and the best interest of the child. Netherlands Quarterly of Human Rights [online], 42(2), 174-194. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1177/09240519241246131 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/09240519241246131
Liamzon, G.M.A., et al., 2021. Surrogacy among Filipinos who have struggled with infertility: a discourse analysis. Journal of Pacific Rim Psychology [online], 15(1), 1-11. Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1834490921997933 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1834490921997933
Lima, D., 2024. Italy’s ban on international surrogacy is part of a drive towards and ultra-conservative idea of family [online]. 20 November. Durham University Law School. Available at: https://www.durham.ac.uk/departments/academic/law/news-and-events/news/2024/november/italys-ban-on-international-surrogacy-is-part-of-a-drive-towards-an-ultra-conservative-idea-of-family/ DOI: https://doi.org/10.64628/AB.fgwfexmjk
López Guzmán, J., and Aparisi Miralles, A., 2012. Aproximación a la problemática ética y jurídica de la maternidad subrogada. Cuadernos de Bioética [online], 23(2), 253-267. Available at: https://www.redalyc.org/pdf/875/87524464001.pdf
Lozanski, K., 2015. Transnational surrogacy: Canada’s contradictions. Social Science & Medicine [online], 124(1), 383-390. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2014.10.003 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2014.10.003
Mannor, K., and Needham, B., 2024. The study of ableism in population health: a critical review. Frontiers in Public Health [online], 12(1), 1-16. Available at: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2024.1383150 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2024.1383150
Mantha-Hollands, A., 2024. Italy’s new surrogacy law could leave children at the risk of statelessness [online]. Robert Schuman Centre: Global Citizenship Observatory. Available at: https://globalcit.eu/italys-new-surrogacy-law-could-leave-children-at-the-risk-of-statelessness/
Margalit, Y., 2014. In defense of surrogacy agreements: a modern contract law perceptive. William & Mary Journal of Women and the Law [online], 20(2), 423-468. Available at: https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/wmjowl/vol20/iss2/6
Marinelli, S. et al., 2024. The legally charged issue of cross-border surrogacy: current regulatory challenges and future prospects. European Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Reproductive Biology [online], 300(1), 41-48. Available at: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301211524003439 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejogrb.2024.07.008
Marinelli, S., et al., 2022. The armed conflict in Ukraine and the risks of inter-country surrogacy: the unsolved dilemma. European Review for Medical and Pharmacological Sciences [online], 26(16), 5646-5650. Available at: https://doi.org/10.26355/eurrev_202208_29497
Martínez-López, J., and Munuera-Gómez, P., 2024. Surrogacy in the United States: analysis of sociodemographic profiles and motivations of surrogates. Reproductive BioMedicine Online [online], 49(4), 1-10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rbmo.2024.104302 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rbmo.2024.104302
Martinho, G., Gonçalves, M., and Matos, M., 2020. Child trafficking, comprehensive needs and professional practices: A systematic review. Children and Youth Services Review [online], 119(1), 89-96. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2020.105674 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2020.105674
Mitra, S., and Schicktanz, S., 2016. Failed surrogate conceptions: social and ethical aspects of preconception disruptions during commercial surrogacy in India. Philosophy, Ethics, and Humanities in Medicine [online], 11(9), 1-16. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13010-016-0040-6 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13010-016-0040-6
Montrone, M., et al., 2020. A comparison of sociodemographic and psychological characteristics among intended parents, surrogates, and partners involved in Australian altruistic surrogacy arrangements. Fertility and Sterility [online], 113(3), 642-652. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2019.10.035 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2019.10.035
Munjal-Shankar, D., 2016. Commercial surrogacy in India: vulnerability contextualised. Journal of the Indian Law Institute [online], 58(3), 350-366. Available at: http://www.jstor.org/stable/45163396
Murdoch, L., and Miller, S., 2014. Gammy: who is telling the truth? The Sydney Morning Herald [online], 6 August. Available at: https://www.smh.com.au/national/gammy-who-is-telling-the-truth-20140805-3d6n1.html
Musavi, S., et al., 2020. Infertile women’s opinion concerning gestational surrogacy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Iran Journal of Public Health [online], 49(8), 1432-1438. Available at: https://doi.org/10.18502/ijph.v49i8.3866 DOI: https://doi.org/10.18502/ijph.v49i8.3866
Narayan, G., et al., 2023. The Surrogacy Regulation Act of 2021: A Right Step Towards an Egalitarian and Inclusive Society? Cureus [online], 15(4). Available at: https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.37864 DOI: https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.37864
Nario-Redmond, M., 2019. Ableism: the causes and consequences of disability prejudice. London: Wiley-Blackwell. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119142140
National Human Genome Research Institute (NIH), 2025. [Fact Sheet] Eugenics and Scientific Racism [online]. Bethesda. Available at: https://www.genome.gov/about-genomics/fact-sheets/Eugenics-and-Scientific-Racism
National Perinatal Epidemiology and Statistical Unit (NPESU), 2025. Australian and New Zealand Assisted Reproduction Database (ANZARD) [online]. Sydney: ANZARD. Available at: https://www.unsw.edu.au/research/npesu/clinical-registries/anz-assisted-reproduction-database
Nayeri, D., 2019. The Farm by Joanne Ramos. Review -the business of exploitation. The Guardian [online], 9 May. Available at: https://www.theguardian.com/books/2019/may/09/the-farm-by-joanne-ramos-review
Neofytou, K., 2023. Eight arrested in Crete over surrogacy and IVF fraud. BioNews [online], 29 August. Available at: https://www.progress.org.uk/eight-arrested-in-crete-over-surrogacy-and-ivf-fraud/
Norton, W., Hudson, N., and Culley, L.,2013. Gay men seeking surrogacy to achieve parenthood. Reproductive BioMedicine Online [online], 27(3), 271-279. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rbmo.2013.03.016 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rbmo.2013.03.016
Nussbaum, M., 2000. Women and human development: the capabilities approach [online]. Cambridge University Press. Available at: https://genderbudgeting.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/nussbaum_women_capabilityapproach2000.pdf
O’Keeffe, R., 2024. Womb to rent: the ethical and legal implications of surrogacy in Ireland. Irish Journal of Medical Science [online], 193(2), 549-554. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11845-023-03546-9 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11845-023-03546-9
Oliver, M., 2013. The social model of disability: thirty years on. Disability & Society [online], 28(7), 1024-1026. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1080/09687599.2013.818773 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09687599.2013.818773
Oliver, S., 2011. Kant on Human Dignity [online]. Berlin/Boston: De Gruyter. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110267167 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110267167
Pande, A., 2015. Global reproductive inequalities, neo-eugenics and commercial surrogacy in India. Current Sociology [online], 64(2), 244-258. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1177/0011392115614786 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0011392115614786
Panitch, V., 2013. Surrogate tourism and reproductive rights. Hypatia [online], 28(2), 274-289. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1111/hypa.12005 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/hypa.12005
Park-Morton, L., 2023. International Rights Frameworks: Are the Law Commissions’ recommendations for reform conforming to international legal standards? Reforming Surrogacy Law [online], 3 July. Available at: https://reformingsurrogacylaw.blog/2023/07/03/international-rights-frameworks-are-the-law-commissions-recommendations-for-reform-conforming-to-international-legal-standards/
Park-Morton, L., 2024. Surrogacy in Latin America, Nicolás Espejo-Yaksic, Claire Fenton-Glynn, and Jens M. Scherpe (eds). International Journal of Law, Policy and the Family [online], 38(1). Available at: https://doi.org/10.1093/lawfam/ebae001 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/lawfam/ebae001
Parks, J.A., and Murphy, T.F., 2018. So not mothers: responsibility for surrogate orphans. Journal of Medical Ethics [online], 44(8), 551-554. Available at: https://www.jstor.org/stable/26879789 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/medethics-2017-104331
Pashkov, V., and Lyfar, A., 2018. Assisted reproductive technologies: the problems of legal enforcement. Wiadomości Lekarskie Poltava Law Institute [online], 71(5), 1066-1070. Available at: https://dspace.nlu.edu.ua/jspui/bitstream/123456789/15233/1/Pashkov_Lyfar_1066-1070.pdf
Patel, N.H., et al., 2018. Insight into Different Aspects of Surrogacy Practices. Journal of Human Reproductive Sciences, 11(3), 212-218. Available at: https://doi.org/10.4103/jhrs.JHRS_138_17 DOI: https://doi.org/10.4103/jhrs.JHRS_138_17
Payne, J., Korolczuk, E., and Mezinska, S., 2020. Surrogacy relationships : a critical interpretative review. Upsala Journal of Medical Sciences [online], 15(2), 183-191. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1080/03009734.2020.1725935 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/03009734.2020.1725935
Pele, A., 2016. Kant on human dignity: a critical approach. Espaço Jurídico Journal of Law [EJJL] [online], 17(2), 493-512. Available at: https://doi.org/10.18593/ejjl.v17i2.9782 DOI: https://doi.org/10.18593/ejjl.v17i2.9782
Perry, K., 2014. British mother rejected disabled twin because she was a “dribbling cabbage,” says surrogate. The Telegraph [online], 26 August. Available at: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/health/children/11055643/British-mother-rejected-disabled-twin-because-she-was-a-dribbling-cabbage-says-surrogate.html
Ramos, J., 2019. The Farm. New York: Random House Trade.
Reuters, 2022. Russia to bar foreigners from using its surrogate mothers – lawmaker. Reuters [online], 27 November. Available at: https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/russia-bar-foreigners-using-its-surrogate-mothers-lawmaker-2022-11-27/
Roberts, E., 1999. Examining surrogacy discourses between feminine power and exploitation. In: N. Scheper-Hughes and C. Fishel, eds., Small Wars: The Cultural Politics of Childhood [online]. Berkeley: University of California Press, 93-110. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1525/9780520919266-005 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1525/9780520919266-005
Rodríguez Jaume, M.J., González Río, M.J., and Caballero Pérez, A., 2024. La opinión pública española sobre la gestación por sustitución. Revista Española de Investigaciones Sociológicas [online], 182(1), 119-138. Available at: https://doi.org/10.5477/cis/reis.182.119 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5477/cis/reis.182.119
Rodríguez-Guitián, A.M., 2025. The adoption by persons with disabilities. Oñati Socio-Legal Series [online], 15(1), 178–206. Available at: https://doi.org/10.35295/osls.iisl.1950 DOI: https://doi.org/10.35295/osls.iisl.1950
Rothler, R., 2017. Disability rights, reproductive technology, and parenthood: unrealised opportunities. Reproductive Health Matters [online], 25(50), 104-113. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1080/09688080.2017.1330105 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09688080.2017.1330105
Rutherford, A., 2024. Eugenics and the misuse of Mendel. The American Journal of Human Genetics [online], 111(7), 1254-1257. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajhg.2024.05.013 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajhg.2024.05.013
Scarpa, S., 2019. Conceptual unclarity, human dignity and contemporary forms of slavery: an appraisal and some proposals. Questions of International Law [online], 64(1), 19-41. Available at: https://www.qil-qdi.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/03_New-Slaveries_SCARPA_FIN-.pdf
Scherpe, J.M., Fenton-Glynn, C., and Kaan, T., 2019. Eastern and Western Perspectives on Surrogacy. Chicago: Intersentia. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781780688633
Shakespeare, T., 1998. Choices and Rights: Eugenics, genetics and disability equality. Disability & Society [online], 13(5), 665-681. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1080/09687599826452 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09687599826452
Sharma, S., 2022. Surrogacy and children with disabilities: a conflict of rights [online]. International Journal of Creative Research Thoughts (IJCRT) [online], 10(7), 2-6. Available at: https://ijcrt.org/papers/IJCRT2207481.pdf
Siegl, V., 2023. Intimate Strangers: commercial surrogacy in Russia and Ukraine and the making of truth [online]. New York: Cornell University Press. Available at: https://www.cornellpress.cornell.edu/book/9781501771316/intimate-strangers/ DOI: https://doi.org/10.1353/book.103735
Simone, K., and Thiele, A., 2021. Cross-border gestational surrogacy and the Canadian healthcare system. Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology Canada [online], 43(5), 677-678. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jogc.2021.02.097 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jogc.2021.02.097
Sinanaj, N., 2021. The right to dignity of the surrogate mother. University of Bologna Law Review [online], 6(2), 261-286. Available at: https://doi.org/10.6092/issn.2531-6133/14253
Smietana, M., Rudrappa, S., and Weis, C., 2021. Moral frameworks of commercial surrogacy within the US, India and Russia. Sexual and Reproductive Health Matters [online], 29(1), 377-393. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1080/26410397.2021.1878674 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/26410397.2021.1878674
Sola, A., 2023. Kant and Deontology: understanding human dignity. In: A. Sola, ed., Ethics and Pandemics [online]. Cham: Springer, 43-59. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-33207-4_3 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-33207-4_3
Stuvøy, I., 2018. Troublesome reproduction: surrogacy under scrutiny. Reproductive Biomedicine & Society Online [online], 7(1), 33-43. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rbms.2018.10.015 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rbms.2018.10.015
Swankar, S., 2021. Reproductive injustice, eugenics, and commercial surrogacy. International Journal of Innovative Research in Engineering & Management (IJIREM) [online], 8(6), 805-808. Available at: https://ijirem.org/view_abstract.php?title=Reproductive-Injustice,-Eugenics,-and-Commercial-Surrogacy-&year=2022&vol=&primary=QVJULTUxMg==
Swartz, D., 2019. Bourdieu’s concept of field in the Anglo-Saxon literature [online]. In: J. Blasius et al., eds., Empirical investigations of social space. Methodos Series [online], vol 15. Cham: Springer. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-15387-8_11 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-15387-8_11
Sweileh, W., 2018. Research trends on human trafficking: a bibliometric analysis using Scopus database. Global Health [online], 14(1), 1-12. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12992-018-0427-9 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12992-018-0427-9
Szygendowska, M., 2021. La gestación por sustitución como una forma de mercantilización del cuerpo femenino. Revista de derecho (Valdivia) [online], 34(1). Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.4067/S0718-09502021000100089 DOI: https://doi.org/10.4067/S0718-09502021000100089
Tanderup, M., et al., 2023. Impact of the war in Ukraine and the COVID-19 pandemic on transnational surrogacy -a qualitative study of Danish infertile couples’ experiences of being in “exile”. Reproductive BioMedicine Online [online], 47(4), 1-10. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rbmo.2023.06.013 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rbmo.2023.06.013
Teman, E., 2008. The social construction of surrogacy research: an anthropological critique of the psychosocial scholarship on surrogate motherhood. Social Science & Medicine [online], 67(7), 1104-1112. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2008.05.026 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2008.05.026
Thapar-Björkert, S., Majumdar, S., and Gondouin, J., 2023. There are two sides of everything: re(locating) vulnerability in the surrogacy industry in India. Feminism & Psychology [online], 33(3), 335-356. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1177/09593535231172592 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/09593535231172592
The Conference on Private International Law (HCCH), 2022. Annual Report [online]. Available at: https://assets.hcch.net/docs/f75bab65-9330-44db-a570-6b2c2954d7ff.pdf
The Conference on Private International Law (HCCH), 2023. Annual Report [online]. Available at: https://assets.hcch.net/docs/38e412a5-f4b0-48cb-a5ea-5e3e076bdfe9.pdf
The Conference on Private International Law (HCCH), 2024. Annual Report [online]. Available at: https://assets.hcch.net/docs/9aea67b0-8815-4f92-8a63-13f00fad8811.pdf
The Moscow Times, 2023. Russia jails 6 for “Trafficking” in first surrogacy probe. The Moscow Times [online], 3 November. Available at: https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2023/11/03/russia-jails-6-for-trafficking-in-first-urrogacy-probe-a82997
Tobin, J., and Cashmore, J., 2020. Thirty years of the CRC: Child protection progress, challenges and opportunities. Child Abuse & Neglect [online], 110(1), 104-436. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chiabu.2020.104436 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chiabu.2020.104436
Torres, G., Shapiro, A., and Mackey, T., 2019. A review of surrogate motherhood regulation in south America countries: pointing to a need for an international legal framework. BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth [online], 19(46), 1-12. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12884-019-2182-1 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12884-019-2182-1
Torres-Díaz, M.C., 2021. El discurso jurídico sobre el cuerpo de las mujeres: o la artificiosa articulación del derecho a la gestación por sustitución. In: A. Carrio Sampedro, ed., Gestación por sustitución: Análisis crítico y propuesta de regulación [online]. 1st ed. Madrid: Marcial Pons, pp. 75–108. Available at: https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv2zp4xmz DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv2zp4xmz.7
Trimmings, K., et al., 2024. Surrogacy and the law: an introduction. In: K. Trimmings, S. Shakargy and C. Achmad, eds., Research Handbook on Surrogacy and the Law [online]. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, 1-6. Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.4337/9781802207651 DOI: https://doi.org/10.4337/9781802207651.00005
Tsai, S., et al., 2020. Surrogacy laws in the United States: What obstetrician-Gynecologists need to know. Obstetrics & Gynecology [online], 135(3), 717-722. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1097/aog.0000000000003698 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/AOG.0000000000003698
UNICEF, 2022. Key considerations: children’s rights & surrogacy [online]. Briefing Note. Available at: https://www.unicef.org/media/115331/file
Unnithan, M., 2010. Infertility and assisted reproductive technologies in a globalizing India: Ethics, medicalisation and agency. Asian Bioethics Review [online], 2(1). Available at: https://muse.jhu.edu/article/416374
Van Toorn, G., and Soldatić, K., 2024. Disablism, racism and the spectre of eugenics in digital welfare. Journal of Sociology [online], 60(3), 523-539. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1177/14407833241244828 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/14407833241244828
Virdi, J., 2024. Why gene editing can never eliminate disability [online]. Wellcome collection [online], 1 February. Available at: https://wellcomecollection.org/stories/why-gene-editing-can-never-eliminate-disability
Vora, K., 2009. Indian transnational surrogacy and the commodification of vital energy. Subjectivity [online], 28(1), 266-278. Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1057/sub.2009.14 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/sub.2009.14
Wang, K., et al., 2024. Ableism in mental healthcare settings: A qualitative study among U.S. adults with disabilities. SSM -Qualitative Research in Health [online], 6(1), 1-8. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssmqr.2024.100498 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssmqr.2024.100498
Wilson, P., 2024. Eugenics. Encyclopaedia Britannica [online]. Available at: https://www.britannica.com/science/eugenics-genetics
Wilson, R., and St Pierre, J., 2016. Eugenics and Disability. In: B. Mirandaa-Galarza and P. Devlieger, eds., Rethinking Disability: World Perspectives in Culture and Society. Garant, 93-112.
World Health Organization (WHO), 2023. Infertility Prevalence Estimates, 1990-2021. Global Report [online]. Sexual and Reproductive Health and Research (SRH). Available at: https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/978920068315
Zdravkova, K., 2019. Reconsidering human dignity in the new era. New Ideas in Psychology [online], 54(1), 112-117. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.newideapsych.2018.12.004 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.newideapsych.2018.12.004
Zhao, Y., 2023. Protection of rights and legal remedies for surrogate mothers in China. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications [online], 10(823), 1-12. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-023-02370-x DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-023-02370-x
Ziehl, S.C., 1993. Feminism and modern reproductive technology [online]. South African Review of Sociology [online], 6(1), 19-34. Available at: https://www.jstor.org/stable/44461238
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Adriana Caballero Pérez, Andrés Mauricio Guzmán Rincón
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
OSLS strictly respects intellectual property rights and it is our policy that the author retains copyright, and articles are made available under a Creative Commons licence. The Creative Commons Non-Commercial Attribution No-Derivatives licence is our default licence and it regulates how others can use your work. Further details available at https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0 If this is not acceptable to you, please contact us.
The non-exclusive permission you grant to us includes the rights to disseminate the bibliographic details of the article, including the abstract supplied by you, and to authorise others, including bibliographic databases, indexing and contents alerting services, to copy and communicate these details.
For information on how to share and store your own article at each stage of production from submission to final publication, please read our Self-Archiving and Sharing policy.
The Copyright Notice showing the author and co-authors, and the Creative Commons license will be displayed on the article, and you must agree to this as part of the submission process. Please ensure that all co-authors are properly attributed and that they understand and accept these terms.
