Page 4 | The Times article on surrogacy and concerns about single fathers

Sixorhalfdozen · 2026-04-23T18:52:19+00:00

Hi all, I haven’t seen a post yet about the article in today’s Times on surrogacy with the title, ‘What it is like to be a single dad (with a child via surrogacy)’. It is an entirely uncritical puff piece on single men who purchase babies and there is no attempt in the article to highlight the risks and harms caused by this barbaric practice. I have written to complain and encourage others to do the same.

HappyNooYear · 23/04/2026 22:02

Sixorhalfdozen · 23/04/2026 20:07

This line in the article was particularly disturbing, ‘To avoid the risk of bonding between surrogate and baby, Simon followed the agency’s advice to select a separate egg donor…’. There is something clearly wrong where the possibility of a mother and baby bonding is described as a risk.

I spotted that too. Chilling comment. Utterly chilling.
the article made me so cross. A dad with a new baby age 50 is just not ideal at all. So darned selfish of him. Quite a few comments along the lines of ‘I wanted to so I did’. Just unbelievable.

Ponks · 23/04/2026 22:01

Sixorhalfdozen · 23/04/2026 20:07

This line in the article was particularly disturbing, ‘To avoid the risk of bonding between surrogate and baby, Simon followed the agency’s advice to select a separate egg donor…’. There is something clearly wrong where the possibility of a mother and baby bonding is described as a risk.

I’ve just read the article in the paper and that sentence stood out to me as particularly vile.

Arran2024 · 23/04/2026 21:56

AlexandraLeaving · 23/04/2026 21:32

I'm not sure I agree with this (though obviously I respect your right to hold a different view to me!).

I don't have a problem with babies being adopted by single men, or couples of gay men, and don't think that looking after babies is solely women's work.

However, I have a major problem with a baby being removed from the only parent it has ever known without there being a good reason (e.g. the child's safety) and the lack of consideration for the impact on the baby in these stories is barbaric. And, related to this, I have a problem with babies being created with the deliberate intent that they should be removed from their birth mother.

Show quote history

Surrogacy was originally seen as an act of sisterhood, of one woman helping another. It was never envisaged that single men would be buying babies abroad, using third party eggs.

I think that gay adoption made it more acceptable for men to be the sole parents.

It is a massive social experiment. Never before has any culture in the world left child rearing to its men and there are reasons for that.

AlexandraLeaving · 23/04/2026 21:32

BeAmberZebra · 23/04/2026 21:02

Sad, worrying what has become of us. Babies should not be given to single men and even arguably two men. Sorry but babies should be with mothers or at least women. How on earth have we got here.

I'm not sure I agree with this (though obviously I respect your right to hold a different view to me!).

I don't have a problem with babies being adopted by single men, or couples of gay men, and don't think that looking after babies is solely women's work.

However, I have a major problem with a baby being removed from the only parent it has ever known without there being a good reason (e.g. the child's safety) and the lack of consideration for the impact on the baby in these stories is barbaric. And, related to this, I have a problem with babies being created with the deliberate intent that they should be removed from their birth mother.

BeAmberZebra · 23/04/2026 21:02

Sad, worrying what has become of us. Babies should not be given to single men and even arguably two men. Sorry but babies should be with mothers or at least women. How on earth have we got here.

harrietm87 · 23/04/2026 20:58

I thought exactly the same. I’ve noticed that the Times has been quietly promoting surrogacy for a long time now - there have been several similar articles. (I would never give them my money - I access it through work). I will also contact them about it.

elgreco · 23/04/2026 20:51

Single men buying babies, i wonder how many are buying them for nefarious reasons?
I hate that i am so cynical.

feellikeanalien · 23/04/2026 20:27

I found it a very uncritical article and wasn't altogether surprised that the comments were turned off. The Times have form for switching off the comments where the issue is controversial.

I was struck by the fact that the single gay dad seemed very clinical in the way he described the process. It really emphasised to me that, however you frame it, he was buying a baby and seemed to regard the egg donor and surrogate in a very detached way. They were simply enablers in his quest for a baby.

It was a very uncomfortable read.

Original poster

Sixorhalfdozen · 23/04/2026 20:17

@JellySaurus I don’t know, but if that’s true then it is another important point not addressed in the article in any way.

OP posts:

JellySaurus · 23/04/2026 20:14

Sixorhalfdozen · 23/04/2026 20:07

This line in the article was particularly disturbing, ‘To avoid the risk of bonding between surrogate and baby, Simon followed the agency’s advice to select a separate egg donor…’. There is something clearly wrong where the possibility of a mother and baby bonding is described as a risk.

Doesn’t a donor egg also make the pregnancy higher risk for the birth mother?

Original poster

Sixorhalfdozen · 23/04/2026 20:13

My complaint included the following points:

’I would like to know if the article is the product of lobbying behind the scenes by surrogacy interest groups, given its bias and the lack of scrutiny. If it is the product of lobbying or a PR initiative, this information should be disclosed.

I would also expect The Times now to publish an article which reflects on the scientific evidence regarding the potential harm caused by surrogacy, an analysis of the evidence regarding why it is not in a newborn baby’s best interests to be removed from its mother, and the ethical reasons why surrogacy is problematic. I will look forward to reading this article which, I hope, will help to bring some balance.’

OP posts:

UtopiaPlanitia · 23/04/2026 20:12

170 single men have applied for surrogacy parental orders since 2019. That fact concerns me as it shows a growing use and acceptance of surrogacy in law for cases outside the more typically promoted altruistic form:

https://x.com/SurrogConcern/status/2046873880627658988?s=20

For those without TwiX accounts:
https://nitter.net/SurrogConcern/status/2046873880627658988?s=20

SurrogacyConcern (@SurrogConcern) on X

Our founder is quoted in today’s @thetimes expressing our concern about increasing numbers of single men pursuing surrogacy.

https://x.com/SurrogConcern/status/2046873880627658988?s=20

Arran2024 · 23/04/2026 20:10

I read it and was horrified. It doesn't cover key issues around what these men have personally done or the wider implications of the surrogacy industry. I am a Times subscriber and wanted to comment online but they had turned off comments - i wonder why!!

Original poster

Sixorhalfdozen · 23/04/2026 20:07

This line in the article was particularly disturbing, ‘To avoid the risk of bonding between surrogate and baby, Simon followed the agency’s advice to select a separate egg donor…’. There is something clearly wrong where the possibility of a mother and baby bonding is described as a risk.

OP posts: