Conceiving Real Protection: Paternalistic Surrogacy Laws & the Necessity of Massachusetts Legislation that Appropriately Protects the Gestational Surrogate

By Jordan L. Payne

This paper will first address the competing frames within the contested realm of surrogacy, contrasting the “baby selling” with “gift of life” rhetoric. Through these frames, this paper will compare Illinois and New Hampshire’s respective regulation of surrogacy contracts. Comparing the intended parent-friendly scheme in Illinois with the surrogate mother-friendly posture of New Hampshire law, this paper will advocate for a sensitive balance in any forthcoming Massachusetts legislation. In envisioning legislation for Massachusetts, I will argue that true protection of the surrogate can be achieved by allowing full payment to the surrogate (beyond medical expenses), and banning any post-birth termination provisions. Additionally, I will urge Massachusetts to incorporate mandatory healthcare for the surrogate, and require legal counsel for both parties to the contract. Finally, I will advocate for incentivization of “gestational surrogacy” in light of the ethical (and often religious) concerns that arise from “traditional surrogacy” arrangements. The ethical debate over surrogacy illuminates the societal forces that often stall legislation – these dilemmas are apparent in the New Hampshire and Illinois surrogacy laws. Massachusetts lawmakers can no longer punt this hotly contested issue to the courts, contributing to the patchwork of uncertain precedent for families opting for surrogacy arrangements.