I can't find it but maybe Beresiner got a preview? She says it's factual and timely but isn't happy that it's not made more appealing to the masses and wasn't wrapped up in a link or blue bow, but then in her column she made clear that she is considering seeking yet another woman to have a baby for her so whilst it's "dripping in connotation" I'm guessing that those connotation just don't suit her narrative.
"But I already understand the producers’ stance as soon as the voiceover begins. It’s factually correct, yes, but the language is nuanced to spotlight the “controversial” nature of the subject. “Would you get pregnant for someone else?” Emphasis on you and else. “And then agree [pause] to give the baby away?” Severe upward inflection on the question mark. The intro goes on to exclaim that surrogacy is “banned in most of Europe”, declares the “emotional sacrifices and physical dangers of having someone else’s baby”, then shows a straight-faced intended parent saying that she chose her surrogate for her “young fleshy womb”. I almost want to turn it off, but, much like watching Matt Hancock stutter his way through a Piers Morgan interview, I’m compelled to persevere."