What is the overall conclusion of the ethical analysis of surrogacy?

The arguments are not sufficient for a ban in principle. The suffering of involuntary childlessness weighs heavily, the harm to the child is not empirically proven, and the objections from the surrogate's side depend on how and where surrogacy is arranged. This suggests a regulated, possibly state-supervised option, e.g. among people close to each other.

• Intended parents: the suffering of involuntary childlessness is a strong reason for surrogacy.
• Child: endangerment of the child's welfare is not empirically supported.
• Surrogate: dignity violation, exploitation and reification depend on the design and circumstances, which are worst in developing and emerging countries.

So the question becomes whether a strict ban, as in Germany, should be maintained, or whether a regulated, state-monitored national option should exist, and whether surrogacy between close persons (e.g. a sister) should be permitted. There, the risks of commercialisation and reification disappear, provided there is no pressure from within the family, so self-determination is preserved.

The structure of the argument is worth remembering: no single objection is absolute, so the ethical answer is about conditions, not a yes or no.

Go deeper:

• Knoepffler & Münch (2018) — the conclusion of the chapter (German).