I have 2 DDs. One is an adult. What I wish for her is that she have the legal right to choose to sell an egg or be surrogate mother if she wanted to. And along with a legal right, to have a regulatory framework with laws and enforceable surrogacy contracts that protect her rights throughout the pregnancy, birth and post birth recovery.
I also have to DDs, both young adults. What I wish for them is to have jobs they enjoy and good health. I don't want them to feel the on,y way they can earn some extra cash is by selling the use of their bodies to others - be that selling eggs, uterus for rent or through sex services (though I don't want to derail the thread on that one, there are plenty of other threads about sex "work").
I don't want their social media to be full of advertisements exhorting them to "be kind" "be amazing" sell the gift of eggs/a baby. Funny how it's only young women that are targeted to "be kind" I'm not aware of young men being told the lie that they must be amazing by selling the use of their body. (Yes I know there are make prostitutes, as I said, don't let's derail the thread).
I fail to see how enforceable contracts give any protection - quite the reverse. The only thing that is enforceable currently, and is expected to remain enforceable, is the right to extract full payment. The law commissioners are quite clear, if commissioning parents renege on the deal and decide they don't want the baby after all, then social services with pick up the pieces in the same way as they do if parents of any other baby reject it at birth (which I have seen in the case of a Down's syndrome baby). If the surrogate mother wants to keep the baby then that will be an option. (Funny how she will suddenly be the mother after all in the instance where she wants to keep a baby that the CP's no longer want).
As regards for protections for the SM should she change her mind and want to keep the baby - as you suggested up thread:
No. The beauty of a contract is that it is negotiable. The surrogate mother can if she has doubts, put in her contract that she has the right to keep the baby if she changes her mind.
The whole point of a major part of the proposed changes is to assign legal parentage in advance of the birth precisely to avoid this scenario, so I can't see contracts saying "of course if you change your mind that will be fine and your right, no problem" being a thing. A major reason for the judges' decision regarding the case of the woman who has been awarded compensation of £500k to go to California to have four surrogate babies was that there she can be sure the contract is enforceable whereas in the U.K. there is the risk the SM may change her mind.
The other thing is that possession is 9/10 of the law. Whoever takes the baby home with them....and BONDS with the baby, and the baby with them is much more likely to be viewed sympathetically by the courts who must act in the child's best interests, so that removing the child from its primary carers will be unlikely to be considered a good idea. Obviously there are other factors that will be taken into consideration as well.
Without trawling through all the cases that have been in the public sphere I think the majority have sided with the commissioning parents for whatever reason/s. Money, education and social standing being a big part of those reasons.