Surrogacy and understanding its origins.

DEAR EDITOR: In a letter published on Monday, Javiera Bellolio argues that surrogacy would be a practice that "denies the right to know one's origins," which does not align with current recommendations on the subject. As with adoption, evidence from the social sciences shows that, in both births through gamete or embryo donation and through surrogacy, it is preferable to introduce the topic of origins early on, rather than waiting for a supposed "moment of revelation." This perspective is consistent with the extensive report published this Saturday, which gives a voice and face to those who have formed families through surrogacy. These testimonies show that the attachment, bond, and identity of children are not determined solely by childbirth or genetic ties. It is well known that keeping one's origins a secret harms the mental health of family members, especially when current genetic technologies make it easy to know one's origins. If the legislator's goal is to protect people, especially children and women, it is essential to consider the available scientific evidence and not legislate based on ideological apprehensions. In a complex matter, an absolute prohibition does not provide better protection: it obscures existing practices and deprives many families of an ethical and regulated framework, while also making it more difficult for those children to learn about those who contributed to their birth. Sofía Salas Ibarra Researcher and instructor in bioethics, UDD More on: Scientific evidence Existing practices Ethical framework