Sat, Jan 17, 2026 page8

• The case against legal surrogacy

  • By Huang Sue-ying 黃淑英
  • • 
    • 
    • 

  Proponents of legalizing surrogacy often cloak the system in the language of reproductive rights and bodily autonomy, arguing that as long as all parties consent, a woman’s body might legitimately become subject to a contract.

  Such arguments deliberately overlook a harsh reality — within unequal economic and gendered power structures, ostensible “voluntariness” is often a choice made under conditions of poverty and oppression, while “informed contractual consent” often serves as a legal and moral refuge for the commissioning parties.

  The Japan Society of Obstetrics and Gynecology has formally prohibited its members from participating in surrogacy since 2003 — demonstrating a baseline of respect for the value of women’s bodies. Pregnancy and childbirth have never been neutral forms of labor — they are medical processes riddled with serious risks. Gestational hypertension, postpartum hemorrhage, postpartum depression and even death are all very real possibilities. To institutionalize the transfer of such risks onto another woman merely to satisfy one’s desire for a child of their own genetic lineage is, in essence, exchanging money for women’s health and lives.

  Supporters say that as long as commercialized surrogacy is prohibited and only an altruistic model is adopted, the issue of objectifying women’s bodies can be avoided entirely. In reality, the boundary between altruism and commerce is extremely fragile. “Unpaid altruism” typically operates on a cost-reimbursement basis, covering only living expenses, legal fees and intermediary fees — but in practice, disguised forms of compensation frequently emerge. Once a system is in place, markets and brokers inevitably become involved, repackaging women’s reproductive capacity as a commodity. History has repeatedly proven that once women’s bodies are subjected to market logic, safeguards ultimately succumb to profit incentives.

  A surrogacy system requires women, after about 10 months of pregnancy and the formation of physical and psychological bonds, to deliver the infant, or face liability for breach of contract. This is not merely a forced severing of emotional ties, but a denial of women’s dignity as mothers.

  Surrogacy systems tend to target society’s most vulnerable women. Cases in Asia and the West have shown that surrogate mothers often come from economically disadvantaged backgrounds, single-parent households or migrant communities. They are not making a truly “free” choice, but are compelled — by the pressure of rent, medical expenses and their children’s education costs — to relinquish the use of their bodies for nine months. This is structural exploitation.

  Some say that rejecting surrogacy amounts to denying the rights of the infertile. Yet no one’s right to become a parent can be founded on inflicting harm on another individual’s body. If society truly wishes to respond to the aspirations of families facing infertility, it should invest far more resources in reforming adoption systems, expanding support for child-rearing and promoting policies that destigmatize diverse families — not create a new class of women whose role is defined by sacrifice.

  Last year, Japan’s parliament introduced legislation on assisted reproduction that includes an explicit ban on surrogacy. In July, a UN report said that the practice of surrogacy is characterized by “the exploitation and violence against women and children, including girls” and “reinforces patriarchal norms by commodifying and objectifying women’s bodies and exposing both surrogate mothers and children to serious human rights violations.”

  The report recommended that measures be taken at the international level to eradicate all forms of surrogacy. It further urges countries, pending a comprehensive ban, to take action to “prevent further harm and strengthen the protection of the rights of women and children involved in surrogacy arrangements.”

  Taiwan should not legalize surrogacy, as doing so would only serve to further entrench one of the patriarchy’s oldest forms of oppression — the imperative of carrying on the family bloodline.

  Huang Sue-ying is the founder of Taiwan Women’s Link.

  Translated by Kyra Gustavsen
• Most Popular

  • 1

    Minister warns Taiwanese about Chinese passports

  • 2

    Marine Corps unit receives M4A1 rifles, source says

  • 3

    Manchester United tap Carrick as interim coach

  • 4

    Taiwan passport rises three spots in global ranking

  • 5

    Onitsuka Tiger suspends Taipei 101 employee for alleged discrimination