I've never thought surrogacy was a good thing. Back in 1985 it seemed clear that Kim Cotton was advocating for something which was essentially selfish and could not be regulated, despite her presentation of it as an essential good for infertile couples.
Surrogacy is always selfish in that the wants of adults are considered before the needs of children. As pp have pointed out, surrogacy by its nature inflicts separation trauma on a newborn - this alone is an unjustifiable result of fulfilling adult wants.
Surrogacy is, essentially, the commisioning of a child by people with the resources to do so. It differs from adoption - which has its own dark side historically - in that it's a transaction designed to actually bring an infant into being, involving the loss of the natural mother.
Adults who want children to themselves, to be treated legally as their own and don't want that to be a compromise will justify surrogacy and will minimise the potential harms to the children delivered by surrogacy, from attachment problems to identity struggles and this is before scenarios such as rejection of disabled infants, parental rights disputes and other breakdowns of relationships and agreements are considered.
Those who think surrogacy is not essentially commercialised and that exploitation of poor women can be guarded against are living in a dreamworld. 'Expenses' are just payment by another name to 'comply' with local laws. People with resources will always be able to circumvent barriers to commercialisation while surrogacy is legalised, often by shopping internationally. The potential for surrogacy to be further commercialised is huge.
No-one has a right to have children. It's an unfairness of human life that some people can and some can't. Yes it will feel unfair to infertile couples that fertility treatments work well for some, or that feckless parents can have kids, yes it will feel unfair to gay men that lesbian couples can have babies by informal donor. It is 'unfair', and many, many aspects of life are. The emotional arguments for surrogacy are always expressed in terms of what the commissioning parents want, but that's not an argument if you consider surrogacy to be wrong, which I do.
It's not an argument in favour of surrogacy to point out that crappy people have babies naturally - society mitigates against that as best it can but people can't be prevented from having their own children outside of a nightmare dystopia.
There are a number of interested parties in the normalisation of surrogacy. People taking advantage of surrogates are likely to be well-resourced straight couples but high-profile male couples have certainly been in the news as part of a move towards acceptance - they are inevitably more visible because they have obviously needed surrogates. None of these adults have a right to have children by whatever means necessary.