Heritage Foundation senior research associate Emma Waters has written extensively against assisted reproductive technologies, particularly IVF and surrogacy. Her opposition draws on unsubstantiated concerns about possible harms to children who lack access to both biological parents and on biblical teaching about proper procreation. [Media Matters, 3/1/24, 4/2/24]

Waters argued that surrogacy and IVF translate to “concubinage” and “a form of slavery.” In the same piece, she wrote that the surrogacy and IVF “industry functions as a form of commercialized and contractual baby selling.” [The Heritage Foundation, 2/1/24]

Waters cites the Bible to attack surrogacy, writing that “such actions produce pain, hardship, and sin in the lives of those who partake.” Waters referenced Genesis 2, in which “God gave man and woman strict boundaries through which to procreate.” She went on, writing that using a surrogate or gamete donation is “a violation of the seventh commandment” and likening the procedure to adultery. [The Heritage Foundation, 1/24/24]

Writing for Heritage, Waters directed Christians to “move beyond the superficial view that if surrogacy and assisted reproductive technology result in the birth of a live child, then it must be good.” [The Heritage Foundation, 1/24/24]

In a piece titled “California Creates Baby-Selling Market Through ‘In Vitro Fertilization for All,’” Waters leaned on the right-wing talking point that same-sex parent households supposedly create worse outcomes for children. She argued that surrogacy “reinforces the myth that a synthetic same-sex coupling is equivalent to the natural family” and that it “creates children in relationship arrangements it knows will be much more likely to be anxious, depressed, and at risk for physical and sexual abuse compared to children raised by their natural, married mothers and fathers.” [The Heritage Foundation, 6/20/23]

Waters has said that commercial surrogacy serves to “erase biological mothers” and contributes to “the erasure of motherhood.” Her language echoes anti-trans rhetoric, which frequently accuses transgender people of “erasing women.” [The Heritage Foundation, 1/8/24; American Moment, Moment of Truth, 12/12/22]

Waters attributed “the recent push to expand IVF and commercial surrogacy rights” to groups “quite hostile to the rights of children and the unborn,” including “the pro-abortion and the LGBTQ coalitions.” [The Heritage Foundation, 1/13/23]

During a 2022 appearance on American Moment’s Moment of Truth podcast, Waters said it was “a big problem” that taxpayer-funded military insurance provides for surrogate mothers. [American Moment, Moment of Truth, 12/12/22]

Waters called on the government to ban international commercial surrogacy, saying it “devalues the meaning of citizenship” and promotes “the commodification of women and children.” [The Heritage Foundation, 11/30/22]

1792 Exchange published a corporate “spotlight bias report” on Netflix, criticizing the streaming service for offering “adoption, surrogacy and parental leave for same-sex couples.” [1792 Exchange, accessed 4/2/24]

The Alliance Defending Freedom published a white paper titled “Surrogacy, Law & Human Rights” in which the organization claimed, “Surrogacy violates the human rights and inherent dignity of women,” and suggested there are various “health dangers” of surrogacy that are not talked about. The white paper asserts that there are “parallels between human trafficking and surrogacy” and between “surrogacy and prostitution.” In an apparent policy suggestion, the ADF stated, “In order to fulfil their obligations to protect the human rights and fundamental dignity of women, States are required to prohibit the act of surrogacy in their national legislation.” [Alliance Defending Freedom International, 2022]

ADF was reportedly consulted by the European Court of Justice about surrogacy laws in France. ADF international director of European advocacy Robert Clarke was quoted as saying, “It is important to uphold these laws protecting children and the family from the raw, undignified commercialization of the human person by the surrogacy industry.” [BioEdge, 5/26/19]

Former ADF senior counsel Jeff Shafer appeared on a panel at a Heritage Foundation event where he referred to surrogacy as the ability to “rent women to gestate these children that are desired.” He also criticized surrogacy and alternative reproductive technologies for opening the door to same-sex couples to conceive children. [YouTube, 12/13/18]

Shafer published an article in The Federalist titled “Babies For Sale, In A Market Near You.” He claimed, “The surrogacy industry exists to decouple child-creation from conjugal relations, to separate gestation from enduring motherhood, and to make biological ties irrelevant to legal child custody.” [The Federalist, 10/6/15]

The American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians and Gynecologists filed an amicus brief asking the Supreme Court to take up a surrogacy case and stop the “exploitation” of mothers and children. [The Hill, 9/30/17; The Washington Post, 5/24/18]

In an article on American Compass’s site, Newsweek’s Philip Jeffery wrote that surrogacy is one of “the ways in which sex and children are treated and discussed as consumer commodities.” [American Compass, 10/2/20]

The American Conservative published a story bemoaning the possibility that some transgender women might become mothers and complaining that surrogacy is opening the door for LGBTQ families to have children. The article also claimed that “surrogacy should also be an easy target for the conservative movement” as the “next big culture war battle.” [The American Conservative, 12/22/23]

Various authors writing for The American Conservative have made derogatory claims about surrogacy, including calling it a “moral abomination” and “relegation of women to the status of incubators.” In a piece from 2016, columnist Rod Dreher called surrogacy “inhuman” and “unnatural.” In 2022, Dreher called it “an abomination.” Them Before Us founder Katy Faust wrote a piece for The American Conservative in which she compared surrogacy with child trafficking, claiming that “the process can be indistinguishable.” [The American Conservative, 3/19/22, 2/16/16, 6/28/22, 5/18/22]

A 2021 article by former American Conservative editor Declan Leary argued, “Surrogacy is an unmitigated and unconscionable evil.” Leary also denounced the idea of gay couples having children and reprimanded adoption agencies for placing children with them. [The American Conservative, 9/8/21]

On the American Principles Project website, a page titled “The Contract with American Families” rebukes surrogacy. It claims the process “facilitates the deliberate separation of children from one or both of their biological parents.” [American Principles Project, accessed 4/2/24]

APP President Terry Schilling posted to X, “Surrogacy is a great euphemism for baby-snatching and womb renting.” He added: “Also, BUYING HUMAN BEINGS.” [Twitter/X, 11/29/23]

In a 2019 report, APP claimed surrogacy “creates an underclass of victimized women … and turns children into commodities.” The report suggested Republican politicians “oppose all efforts to legalize commercial surrogacy” and build “an effective coalition to fight commercial surrogacy.” [American Principles Project, 2019]

In a post on the Americans United for Life site, former legal assistant Hannah Ward referred to surrogacy as “incompatible with a free society and the human right to life.” Ward went on to decry the “artificial, mercenary character of surrogacy.” [Americans United for Life, 5/16/23]

California Family Council released a statement in response to a California bill complaining that it “would require employers to provide insurance plans that cover all nonexperimental fertility treatments” including the cost of in vitro fertilization for a hired surrogate. CFC argued the bill would allow LGBTQ families to have children and “further erode the father, mother, and child nuclear family.” [California Family Council, 6/19/23]

In 2022, CFC attacked another California bill, the Equal Access to Reproductive Care Act, for providing reproductive care to LGBTQ families. CFC claimed the bill is “disregarding basic science and natural law” and “irresponsible and immoral.” The report argued that the “use of technology to bring children into the world” has “serious moral implications” and that “surrogacy … intentionally separates a child from one or both of his biological parents.” [California Family Council, 9/27/22]

CFC has repeatedly complained about removing children from their biological parents and allowing LGTBQ families to have children in various reports. One such report, titled “Surrogacy Strips Children of Their Basic Rights,” claims that surrogacy “inflicts a family wound.” [California Family Council, 8/15/22, 12/12/22, 7/17/23]

​​​​​​In its publication The American Mind, The Claremont Institute claimed surrogacy is a tool used by “oligarchs” to “attack the concept of motherhood.” Author Tara Thieke argued that the idea of surrogacy as “liberation” constitutes “warfare upon vernacular traditions” and will lead to “further overall misery and enslavement.” [The American Mind, 10/19/21]

In a piece published by National Review, Discovery Institute senior fellow Wesley J. Smith wrote that “the fertility industry has helped unleash a sort of ‘new eugenics’” with surrogacy. [National Review, 7/7/22]

In earlier pieces published to the Discovery Institute’s site, Smith argued that surrogacy makes a “legal, emotional, and moral mess” of “family life” and compared surrogate mothers to “workers exploited in sweatshop conditions.” [Discovery Institute, 10/20/14, 8/21/13, 10/4/13, 10/27/17]

Ethics and Public Policy Center analyst Natalie Dodson wrote that the assisted reproductive technology industry, which includes surrogacy, “poses serious risk to both women and children.” [Ethics and Public Policy Center, 1/29/24]

EPPC fellow Brad Littlejohn celebrated Pope Francis’ call for a global ban on what Littlejohn deemed “the despicable practice of surrogacy,” saying the pope had observed “that surrogacy represents a form of human trafficking.” [Ethics and Public Policy Center, 1/26/24; The Associated Press, 1/8/24]

In a piece titled “The Future of Manufactured Children,” EPPC fellow Carl Trueman wrote that “surrogacy has attenuated the relationship between conception, pregnancy, and childbirth.” [Ethics and Public Policy Center, 11/2/23]

EPPC fellow Nathanael Blake wrote for The Federalist that commercial surrogacy “breeds children like livestock.” [The Federalist, 6/13/22]

In another article, Blake called commercial surrogacy “just a form of concubinage for the well-off.” [Ethics and Public Policy Center, 5/10/22]

In 2013, as Washington, D.C., was considering a bill to decriminalize surrogacy by lifting a longstanding ban on the reproductive option, EPPC senior fellow George Weigel argued that it “treats the child as a thing, a commodity that can be bought and sold.” Weigel described the bill as “pushed by the same people who brought ‘gay marriage’ to the shores of the Potomac River.” [Ethics and Public Policy Center, 10/23/13]

Family Policy Alliance wrote on its website that surrogacy contracts include “stripping the true biological parents of their right to parent their child.” Elsewhere on its website, FPA stated that assisted reproductive technologies, including surrogacy, have “grown into a wildly unregulated multi-billion dollar industry,” which, it warned, “single people, transgender individuals and, especially, gay couples,” can use. [Family Policy Alliance, accessed 4/2/24, accessed 4/2/24]

The organization tweeted in 2019, “The reality of surrogacy … is a multitude of health risks and psychological and medical harms.” [Twitter/X, 5/9/19]

In 2017, Family Research Council’s Arina Grossu called on the Supreme Court to “review the constitutional violations inherent” in surrogacy, which she said “preys upon women and children.” She attacked surrogacy, saying it creates children “with a plan in advance … to deprive them of the love and support of their mother.” [Family Research Council, 9/30/17]

According to a 2014 New York Times article, the Family Research Council lobbied for the sort of protections now causing the legal difficulties that those involved with surrogacy must endure, as the group lobbied for protections for embryos created through in vitro fertilization. [The New York Times, 9/7/14]

In a piece for National Review, Independent Women’s Forum visiting fellow Madeleine Kearns wrote that in “the use of donor gametes and surrogacy … the child created is, in effect, an orphan.” Kearns has also said that she opposes surrogacy “regardless of the sex of the aspiring parents.” [National Review, 12/11/23; 1/17/24]

William Wolfe, of Liberty University’s Standing for Freedom Center, attacked the Department of Veterans Affairs for offering surrogacy options for single people and same-sex couples “all on your dime,” calling it “taxpayer-funded trampling of children’s rights and the government-sponsored destruction of the family.” [Standing for Freedom Center, 3/14/24]

Wolfe has also attacked surrogacy on the basis of his opposition to same-sex marriage. He wrote: “Surrogacy tells humanity that they can try to make babies anywhere, at any time, and for anyone — and whether or not that child is going to be both the product, and placed in, a man-woman marriage becomes irrelevant.” [Standing for Freedom Center, 12/28/23]

In a piece titled “Christian: Let The World Call Us Fools — So Long As God Calls Us Faithful,” Wolfe wrote that “rent-a-womb surrogacy is a perversion of God’s good plan for procreation.” [Standing for Freedom Center, 10/6/22]

According to Wolfe, surrogacy is an “unethical, exploitative industry that causes harm to everyone involved except for the intended parents.” [Standing for Freedom Center, 4/21/22] 

Students for Life of America wrote on Instagram that “surrogacy creates a broken circumstance” for children. [Instagram, 6/1/23]

On Students for Life of America’s Unapologetic podcast, host Autumn Higashi said that surrogacy feels “transactional because that’s exactly what it is.” She went on to argue that surrogacy is “a vanity of self, of ‘I want a baby, I don’t want to do the work.’” Higashi voiced similar opposition to surrogacy in another episode of the podcast, titled “Surrogacy Makes Women Incubators.” [Students for Life of America, Unapologetic, 5/31/23, 10/31/22]

In a blog post on babies who had been delivered via surrogate in Ukraine and subsequently trapped there due to the ongoing war, contributing writer for Students for Life of America Anna Reynolds lamented the “unintended consequences” of surrogacy, calling it a “heavily commercialized baby market.” [Students for Life of America, 4/6/22]

Turning Point USA’s Alex Clark criticized surrogacy partially on the basis that Khloe Kardashian had “explained that the whole process was ‘such a transactional experience,’ and said that she felt guilt and a lack of connection with her son.” [Turning Point USA, 7/14/23]

Clark has also argued that assisted reproductive technologies such as surrogacy and IVF represent “a culture that glorifies parenthood on demand.” [Turning Point USA, 6/6/23] 

Clark has often referenced Katy Faust, who argued on Clark’s show The Spillover that surrogacy contributes to “a world where children are being designed and purchased and commodified.” Faust later said that “all third-party reproduction violates the rights of children.” Discussing Faust’s position in a written piece, Clark wrote that “mothers and fathers are not interchangeable.” [Turning Point USA, The Spillover, 8/26/22; Turning Point USA, 6/6/23]