Your article (Rise in overseas surrogates ‘increases risk of stateless babies, 19 July) suggests that the solution lies in better regulation to make surrogacy safe and ethical. But regulation cannot remove the central ethical problem: every surrogacy arrangement begins with the deliberate separation of a newborn baby from their mother, who they have naturally bonded with throughout the pregnancy.
Regulation is also not able to eliminate the physical risks borne exclusively by surrogate mothers. A study in Canada has suggested that surrogate mothers are more likely to experience severe complications including postpartum haemorrhage and pre-eclampsia than women who conceived naturally or with IVF.
Regulation cannot eliminate the risks and realities of surrogacy, and the evidence referenced in the article should give decision-makers pause. Countries and US states that have introduced detailed regulatory frameworks continue to report concerns about the exploitation of economically vulnerable women, inadequate informed consent and difficulties with oversight and enforcement. Laws may change the way that surrogacy is organised, but they have not consistently prevented abuses or addressed the inequalities that drive many women to engage with surrogacy.
Rather than assuming that better regulation will make surrogacy ethical, we should ask whether a practice that depends on separating a baby from their birth mother, while exposing women to significant medical risks and creating opportunities for exploitation, can ever truly be made safe.
Lexi Ellingsworth
Founder, Stop Surrogacy Now UK
Have an opinion on anything you’ve read in the Guardian today? Please email us your letter and it will be considered for publication in our letters section.
