Vatican Diplomat Archbishop Gallagher Calls on Governments to Ban Surrogacy Citing Pope Leo XIV's Speech
.jpeg)
Archbishop Paul Richard Gallagher, Secretary for Relations with States within the Holy See's Secretariat of State, was a key speaker in the Italian Embassy's event titled “A United Front for Human Dignity: Preventing the Commodification of Women and Children in Surrogacy.” According to the Italian Embassy to the Holy See, the intent of the Jan. 13 event was to “foster international debate on the practice of surrogacy and raise awareness of its ethical, legal, and social implications.” Participants included Eugenia Maria Roccella, the Italian minister for family, birth rate and equal opportunities; Francesco Di Nitto, Italian ambassador to the Holy See; and Georgios Poulides, ambassador of Cyprus to the Holy See and Dean of the diplomatic corps.
Speech of Archbishop Gallagher: (Following greetings) As you well know, in his address last Friday (Address to Diplomats), the Holy Father (Pope Leo XIV) also addressed the
issue that is the focus of today's meeting: surrogate motherhood.
I would like to start with one of his words.
We must categorically reject practices that deny or exploit the
origin of life and its development, including surrogate motherhood, which, by transforming gestation into a negotiable service,
violates the dignity of both the child, reduced to a product, and the mother.
It exploits the body and the procreative process, and alters the original rationality of the family.
This is not the first time that
a pontiff has addressed this issue before the diplomatic corps.
Already two years ago, Pope Francis declared: "I consider the practice of so-called surrogate motherhood to be deplorable." It seriously undermines the dignity of women and children. It is based on the exploitation of the mother's situation of material need. A child is always a gift, never the object of a contract, and he concluded by calling for a commitment from the international community to universally prohibit this practice.
Pope Francis's words sparked a widespread media outcry at the time.
Emblematic of this are the testimonies of pregnant surrogacy mothers at the beginning of the wars in Ukraine, forced to abandon their families abroad to save the babies they were carrying, moving to areas less exposed to the risk of conflict. We can therefore conclude this first part by agreeing that surrogacy entails a double violation of dignity: that of the child and that of the mother. This brings us to the second part of this paper, dedicated to the actions needed to combat this practice.
Many states have already chosen to prohibit surrogacy within their legal systems. This is certainly a positive and appropriate decision in light of the rights at stake. However, the issue becomes more complicated when the surrogacy occurs abroad and the citizens, returning to their country of origin, present the state with a fait accompli. This highlights the shortcomings of institutions that limit themselves to regulating events that have occurred exclusively within their own national territory. Alternatively, as Italy has recently demonstrated, it is possible to introduce measures into domestic law that take into account the transnational nature of the phenomenon.
A choice that is actually also based on Article 3, paragraph 1 of the Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child, concerning the sale of children. This Protocol establishes that each State Party shall ensure that its domestic criminal law fully covers at least the following acts and activities, regardless of whether the crimes are committed domestically or transnationally by an individual or an organized group in relation to the sale of children. Article 4, paragraph 2 of the same Protocol also specifies that each State Party may take the necessary measures to establish its jurisdiction to hear the crimes set forth in Article 3, paragraph 1. If the alleged perpetrator is a national of that State and habitually resides there, or the victim is a national of that State.
Faced with the complexity of the transnational dimension of surrogacy, there may be a temptation not to prohibit the practice, but rather to seek to regulate it, thus ensuring a minimum standard of protection for the surrogate mother and the child. This is the approach taken by the AIA Conference on Private International Law, which in recent years established a working group dedicated to surrogacy, considering the creation of an international legal framework aimed at recognizing the legal status of children born through this questionable practice.
In this regard, I would like to emphasize the position taken by Italy, the only country in the European Union to firmly oppose the approach outlined by the conference. Such an approach appears inadequate and risks even proving counterproductive to the objective of combating surrogacy. It would end up, albeit unintentionally, offering potential international clients legal certainty.
By eliminating the deterrent effect of doubts, the child's recognition upon return to the country of origin is sought. It must not be forgotten that surrogacy constitutes a real market, and like any market, one of the determining factors for its development is legal certainty. Another typical market rule is that demand influences supply. In other words, if the procedures for purchasing a child abroad become simpler and safer, a growing number of potential parents will be induced to pursue surrogacy, and consequently, an ever-increasing number of children will be conceived specifically to be sold. The argument of the best interests of the child, which one would like to protect through the creation of a uniform and certain regulatory framework, cannot be invoked to the contrary.
In reality, the phenomenon of children born through surrogacy requires, on the one hand, measures to discourage its spread, as already highlighted, and on the other, a case-by-case, non-automatic assessment of what constitutes the best interests of the child, once born, in light of the various contingencies. In conclusion, faced with the incompatibility of surrogacy with human dignity, the only possible response is to call for its abolition. Given the transnational nature of the phenomenon, it is essential that action also develop at the international level. We thus return to the hope expressed by Pope Francis two years ago: a universal ban on this practice. Since then, there have been some encouraging signals and initial attempts in this direction. The European Parliament, for example, adopted a resolution on November 13 on the strategy for gender equality, in which point 14 condemns the practice of surrogacy, which involves reproductive exploitation and the use of women's bodies for economic or other gain, particularly in the case of particularly vulnerable women in third countries. The same resolution also urged the Commission to adopt measures that will help put an end to this phenomenon. I would like to highlight in particular the report presented last year by S. Reem Alem, UN Special Rapporteur on Violence against Women and Girls. Her conclusions recommend the adoption of a binding international instrument banning surrogacy. This is a significant first step that deserves to be welcomed. The issue of surrogacy has now become, to some extent, one of the global issues to be addressed at the UN. As mentioned, this is the beginning of a journey toward the goal of adopting a new international instrument or possibly revising an existing one. Further steps will be necessary, among which the introduction of an international moratorium on cross-border surrogacy may be particularly important.
The aim, therefore, is to begin promoting the abolition of extended maternity leave in the international legal system and subsequently gradually extend the recognition and effectiveness of the related ban, as has already happened and continues to happen with the progressive abolition of the death penalty. It is also appropriate to reiterate that an international ban on surrogacy does not prevent states from addressing the situations of children born through this practice with appropriate tools. Surrogate motherhood can only be effectively combated through the firm political will shared by a sufficient number of states that enshrine its ban in their respective domestic laws and commit to including it in international law to achieve the necessary universal ban, along with a broad consensus among civil society and non-governmental organizations capable of resolutely supporting this objective.
It is therefore important not to limit and involve those who already fully share this vision, but to build pragmatic alliances aimed at achieving a common goal. It is also necessary to value the so-called small steps: individual legislative changes at the national level that hinder surrogacy in different countries.
These interventions constitute real building blocks that, taken together, contribute to generating a collective awareness of the unacceptability of the phenomenon, paving the way for a general international ostracism. The Holy See, for its part, is ready and available to wholeheartedly support the efforts aimed at pursuing this direction, and I thank you for your attention.
Already two years ago, Pope Francis declared: "I consider the practice of so-called surrogate motherhood to be deplorable." It seriously undermines the dignity of women and children. It is based on the exploitation of the mother's situation of material need. A child is always a gift, never the object of a contract, and he concluded by calling for a commitment from the international community to universally prohibit this practice.
Pope Francis's words sparked a widespread media outcry at the time.
Indeed, their resonance is striking,
since they are in full continuity with the teaching of the
Church on the dignity of the person and the sacredness of life, highlighting
the concrete implications that derive from them.
Following this line of reflection, I intend to propose that we first dwell on the reasons why surrogate motherhood is reprehensible. It is contrary to human dignity. I will then turn my attention to the consequences and essential guidelines for commitment that the international community is called to adopt on this issue. The central issue of surrogacy lies in the commodification of the person, which entails a grave violation of his or her dignity.
It is precisely for this reason that the Catholic Church devotes particular intent to it. As Pope Leo XIV reiterated last Friday, in its international relations and actions, the Holy See consistently defends the inalienable dignity of every person. The protection of human dignity is, moreover, a cornerstone of the action of public authorities in contemporary liberal democracies. This dignity expresses the status of an end in itself of every individual, the bearer of an intrinsic and indestructible value with respect to any other reality.
It presents itself as an insurmountable limit to every form of power, both public and private, and even to the arbitrariness of the individual over himself. Each person possesses a unique value and is incompatible with any treatment that reduces them to an object of transaction, even in the seemingly generous form of donation. Surrogacy places the unborn child, and, albeit in a different way, the pregnant woman, in the condition of human beings made available to others.
Following this line of reflection, I intend to propose that we first dwell on the reasons why surrogate motherhood is reprehensible. It is contrary to human dignity. I will then turn my attention to the consequences and essential guidelines for commitment that the international community is called to adopt on this issue. The central issue of surrogacy lies in the commodification of the person, which entails a grave violation of his or her dignity.
It is precisely for this reason that the Catholic Church devotes particular intent to it. As Pope Leo XIV reiterated last Friday, in its international relations and actions, the Holy See consistently defends the inalienable dignity of every person. The protection of human dignity is, moreover, a cornerstone of the action of public authorities in contemporary liberal democracies. This dignity expresses the status of an end in itself of every individual, the bearer of an intrinsic and indestructible value with respect to any other reality.
It presents itself as an insurmountable limit to every form of power, both public and private, and even to the arbitrariness of the individual over himself. Each person possesses a unique value and is incompatible with any treatment that reduces them to an object of transaction, even in the seemingly generous form of donation. Surrogacy places the unborn child, and, albeit in a different way, the pregnant woman, in the condition of human beings made available to others.
In this way, the unavailability of the person is violated and
his dignity is seriously compromised. This does not diminish, but rather strengthens,
the need to welcome every newborn, since each individual
is inherently a bearer of dignity, regardless
of the circumstances of his or her birth.
Reiterating this acceptance, it must be emphasized that in the context of
surrogacy, as Pope Leo highlighted, the child is first and foremost
reduced to a product. Complex, detailed contracts are used,
which in some cases even establish the expected characteristics
of the unborn child, predicting, for example, what happens if
it is unknown whether the child is unhealthy or does not correspond to what was ordered.
As with goods, a condition is set for acceptance of the
final result. The child, and it is painful to note,
is reshaped, often sold, transferred from one
person to another. And in cases of non-altruistic surrogacy,
the final payment occurs precisely at the moment of delivery of the newborn.
Article 2 of the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child, on the Sale of Children, Child Prostitution, and Child Pornography, defines the sale of children as any act
or transaction involving the transfer of a child from one
person or group of persons to another person or group of persons
for payment or any other form of service.
In light of this definition, so-called non-altruistic surrogacy
satisfies all the elements to be classified as such: the remuneration, the
transfer of the child, and the link between the two aspects, namely, the transfer in
exchange for financial service. Reality cannot be ignored. At its
core, this practice translates into the sale of a child.
The United Nations Special Rapporteur on the Sale or Sexual Use of Children, including
prostitution, child pornography, and other content representing
sexual violence against children, recognized in her 2018 report that
numerous cases of surrogacy constitute the crime of selling children,
prohibited under Article 35 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child.
Surrogacy, in addition to undermining the dignity of the child by treating them as a purchasable commodity, also negatively impacts other fundamental rights. Children are deprived of the right to be raised by their natural mothers and often even the right to know their biological origins. They are handed over to buyers under a prenatal contract that prioritizes the adults' wishes rather than the child's best interests. This results in paradoxical situations: Children grow up like patchwork babies, sometimes without a father or mother to care for them.
Others are forced to integrate into their biography up to four or five parental figures, some of whom remain anonymous and therefore unknown.
We are therefore faced with a violation of the right enshrined in Article 7 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child, the right to know one's parents and to be cared for by them as much as possible. It is true that in some circumstances, the father or mother may pass away due to de facto circumstances. However, these are exceptional and emergency situations that must be remedied.
Their existence can in no way justify the intentional creation of analogous conditions, as occurs instead in surrogate parenthood, which plans the separation between biological mother and child. As already mentioned, surrogate motherhood involves a violation of the dignity not only of the child, but also of the biological mother. It reduces the female body to an instrument of reproductive services, imposing a fracture between the woman's identity and her biological and rational bond with the child she carries in her womb. This is a commodification of the body and the generative function that obscures the existential and non-transferable significance of gestation. Pregnancy, in fact, is not a mere biological function replaceable by a mechanical device such as an artificial uterus designed to satisfy the organic needs of the conceived being. The interaction between mother and child during childbirth is reduced to a biological process, but it gives rise to a first bond of care that is part of the human meaning of generation, an unrepeatable and dynamic union between two human beings.
It is important to emphasize that the
consequences of surrogacy are not limited to the individual mother or the
individual child, but profoundly impact society's conception of motherhood, parenthood,
and more generally, human dignity. It separates biological, managerial motherhood
from legal and social parenthood,
fragmenting maternal identity and reducing women's
reproductive commitment to a contractable and monetizable service
or to the so-called altruistic model offered free of charge.
It is no coincidence that particularly harsh criticism also comes from a segment of the
feminist world that rejects the idea that surrogacy reduces women to a
mere incubator. It is therefore essential to contrast the way
this practice is presented, often in positive and superficial tones,
taking inspiration from celebrities who have resorted to it. Surrogacy
is not simply a different way of giving life, but a form of
exploitation of the female body. It does not represent progress, but rather
the expression of new forms of colonialism. It must not be forgotten that
surrogacy is fueled by market mechanisms, which foster the
exploitation of vulnerable people.
The formal consent given by the woman is no guarantee against
exploitation. In reality, many surrogate mothers enter into such
agreements driven by economic pressure, with limited legal protections and little
autonomy with respect to the contractual terms often imposed by
intermediary agencies. The women involved thus find themselves
with limited leeway regarding their own bodies, subjected to medical procedures and
to contractual clauses, which entail an intolerable loss of autonomy,
which is all the more pronounced the higher the sum paid by the clients.Surrogacy, in addition to undermining the dignity of the child by treating them as a purchasable commodity, also negatively impacts other fundamental rights. Children are deprived of the right to be raised by their natural mothers and often even the right to know their biological origins. They are handed over to buyers under a prenatal contract that prioritizes the adults' wishes rather than the child's best interests. This results in paradoxical situations: Children grow up like patchwork babies, sometimes without a father or mother to care for them.
Others are forced to integrate into their biography up to four or five parental figures, some of whom remain anonymous and therefore unknown.
We are therefore faced with a violation of the right enshrined in Article 7 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child, the right to know one's parents and to be cared for by them as much as possible. It is true that in some circumstances, the father or mother may pass away due to de facto circumstances. However, these are exceptional and emergency situations that must be remedied.
Their existence can in no way justify the intentional creation of analogous conditions, as occurs instead in surrogate parenthood, which plans the separation between biological mother and child. As already mentioned, surrogate motherhood involves a violation of the dignity not only of the child, but also of the biological mother. It reduces the female body to an instrument of reproductive services, imposing a fracture between the woman's identity and her biological and rational bond with the child she carries in her womb. This is a commodification of the body and the generative function that obscures the existential and non-transferable significance of gestation. Pregnancy, in fact, is not a mere biological function replaceable by a mechanical device such as an artificial uterus designed to satisfy the organic needs of the conceived being. The interaction between mother and child during childbirth is reduced to a biological process, but it gives rise to a first bond of care that is part of the human meaning of generation, an unrepeatable and dynamic union between two human beings.
Emblematic of this are the testimonies of pregnant surrogacy mothers at the beginning of the wars in Ukraine, forced to abandon their families abroad to save the babies they were carrying, moving to areas less exposed to the risk of conflict. We can therefore conclude this first part by agreeing that surrogacy entails a double violation of dignity: that of the child and that of the mother. This brings us to the second part of this paper, dedicated to the actions needed to combat this practice.
Many states have already chosen to prohibit surrogacy within their legal systems. This is certainly a positive and appropriate decision in light of the rights at stake. However, the issue becomes more complicated when the surrogacy occurs abroad and the citizens, returning to their country of origin, present the state with a fait accompli. This highlights the shortcomings of institutions that limit themselves to regulating events that have occurred exclusively within their own national territory. Alternatively, as Italy has recently demonstrated, it is possible to introduce measures into domestic law that take into account the transnational nature of the phenomenon.
A choice that is actually also based on Article 3, paragraph 1 of the Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child, concerning the sale of children. This Protocol establishes that each State Party shall ensure that its domestic criminal law fully covers at least the following acts and activities, regardless of whether the crimes are committed domestically or transnationally by an individual or an organized group in relation to the sale of children. Article 4, paragraph 2 of the same Protocol also specifies that each State Party may take the necessary measures to establish its jurisdiction to hear the crimes set forth in Article 3, paragraph 1. If the alleged perpetrator is a national of that State and habitually resides there, or the victim is a national of that State.
Faced with the complexity of the transnational dimension of surrogacy, there may be a temptation not to prohibit the practice, but rather to seek to regulate it, thus ensuring a minimum standard of protection for the surrogate mother and the child. This is the approach taken by the AIA Conference on Private International Law, which in recent years established a working group dedicated to surrogacy, considering the creation of an international legal framework aimed at recognizing the legal status of children born through this questionable practice.
In this regard, I would like to emphasize the position taken by Italy, the only country in the European Union to firmly oppose the approach outlined by the conference. Such an approach appears inadequate and risks even proving counterproductive to the objective of combating surrogacy. It would end up, albeit unintentionally, offering potential international clients legal certainty.
By eliminating the deterrent effect of doubts, the child's recognition upon return to the country of origin is sought. It must not be forgotten that surrogacy constitutes a real market, and like any market, one of the determining factors for its development is legal certainty. Another typical market rule is that demand influences supply. In other words, if the procedures for purchasing a child abroad become simpler and safer, a growing number of potential parents will be induced to pursue surrogacy, and consequently, an ever-increasing number of children will be conceived specifically to be sold. The argument of the best interests of the child, which one would like to protect through the creation of a uniform and certain regulatory framework, cannot be invoked to the contrary.
In reality, the phenomenon of children born through surrogacy requires, on the one hand, measures to discourage its spread, as already highlighted, and on the other, a case-by-case, non-automatic assessment of what constitutes the best interests of the child, once born, in light of the various contingencies. In conclusion, faced with the incompatibility of surrogacy with human dignity, the only possible response is to call for its abolition. Given the transnational nature of the phenomenon, it is essential that action also develop at the international level. We thus return to the hope expressed by Pope Francis two years ago: a universal ban on this practice. Since then, there have been some encouraging signals and initial attempts in this direction. The European Parliament, for example, adopted a resolution on November 13 on the strategy for gender equality, in which point 14 condemns the practice of surrogacy, which involves reproductive exploitation and the use of women's bodies for economic or other gain, particularly in the case of particularly vulnerable women in third countries. The same resolution also urged the Commission to adopt measures that will help put an end to this phenomenon. I would like to highlight in particular the report presented last year by S. Reem Alem, UN Special Rapporteur on Violence against Women and Girls. Her conclusions recommend the adoption of a binding international instrument banning surrogacy. This is a significant first step that deserves to be welcomed. The issue of surrogacy has now become, to some extent, one of the global issues to be addressed at the UN. As mentioned, this is the beginning of a journey toward the goal of adopting a new international instrument or possibly revising an existing one. Further steps will be necessary, among which the introduction of an international moratorium on cross-border surrogacy may be particularly important.
The aim, therefore, is to begin promoting the abolition of extended maternity leave in the international legal system and subsequently gradually extend the recognition and effectiveness of the related ban, as has already happened and continues to happen with the progressive abolition of the death penalty. It is also appropriate to reiterate that an international ban on surrogacy does not prevent states from addressing the situations of children born through this practice with appropriate tools. Surrogate motherhood can only be effectively combated through the firm political will shared by a sufficient number of states that enshrine its ban in their respective domestic laws and commit to including it in international law to achieve the necessary universal ban, along with a broad consensus among civil society and non-governmental organizations capable of resolutely supporting this objective.
It is therefore important not to limit and involve those who already fully share this vision, but to build pragmatic alliances aimed at achieving a common goal. It is also necessary to value the so-called small steps: individual legislative changes at the national level that hinder surrogacy in different countries.
These interventions constitute real building blocks that, taken together, contribute to generating a collective awareness of the unacceptability of the phenomenon, paving the way for a general international ostracism. The Holy See, for its part, is ready and available to wholeheartedly support the efforts aimed at pursuing this direction, and I thank you for your attention.
Comments