DEAR EDITOR:
The letter from Javier Silva raises legitimate questions that deserve a direct response.
The position we hold is not an invention or a slogan; it is the conclusion of the report presented in October 2025 to the General Assembly by Reem Alsalem, the UN Special Rapporteur on violence against women and girls. Her diagnosis was unequivocal: "the modus operandi of the surrogacy industry is exploitative and abusive."
No one discriminates against children born through surrogacy. Opposing a practice and fully respecting those who were born under it are not incompatible positions. Precisely because we care about their well-being, we are concerned about a practice that commodifies them through contracts and denies them the right to know their origins, according to the Convention on the Rights of the Child.
Most women who become surrogates are in situations of economic or social vulnerability. In that context, "consent" is not freely given; it is conditioned by necessity. And even if it is accepted as freely given, the contract itself negates it: the surrogate mothers are subject to clauses that control their diet, their mobility, their private lives, and even the possibility of having an abortion, according to the wishes of the commissioning parents.
This is not what we call regulation. We call it legitimization.
Javiera Bellolio
Universidad de los Andes
AI Brief
Your highlights
CommentsTO THE EDITOR:The letter from Javier Silva raises legitimate questions that deserve a direct answer. The position we hold is not an invention or a slogan: it is the conclusion of the report presented in October 2025 to the General Assembly by Reem Alsalem, the UN Special Rapporteur on violence against women and girls. Her diagnosis was unequivocal: "the modus operandi of the surrogacy industry is exploitative and abusive." No one discriminates against children born through surrogacy. Opposing a practice and fully respecting those who were born under it are not incompatible positions. Precisely because we care about their well-being, we are concerned about a practice that commodifies them contractually and denies them the right to know their origins, according to the Convention on the Rights of the Child. Most women who carry children for others are in situations of economic or social vulnerability. In that context, "consent" is not free: it is conditioned by necessity. And even if it is accepted as free, the contract itself negates it: the surrogate mothers are subject to clauses that control their diet, their mobility, their private life, and even the possibility of having an abortion, according to the wishes of the commissioning parents. This is not called regulation; it is called legitimization. Javiera BellolioUniversity of the AndesMore on:ChildrenRightsUN Report