Surrogacy Abortion Disputes Reveal 'Her Body, Her Choice' as Inconsistent Rhetoric
Source: Jordan Boyd. "‘Her Body, Her Choice’ Was Always A Lie." August 17, 2026. thefederalist.com
The Gist
The author argues that a surrogate's story—where intended parents tried to force her to abort a baby with a treatable heart condition, but she refused and later lost custody anyway—proves that the pro-choice slogan 'her body, her choice' is hypocritical. She claims this shows that when money and contracts are involved, women's bodily autonomy and unborn babies' lives are both disposable, revealing the emptiness of abortion-rights rhetoric.
Conclusion
The pro-choice slogan 'her body, her choice' is dishonest/inconsistent, as demonstrated by surrogacy arrangements where contracts attempt to compel abortion and where intended parents' wishes override the surrogate's bodily autonomy and the unborn child's life.
Premises
- Surrogacy contracts often contain clauses allowing intended parents to demand abortion for reasons like genetic defects, multiples, or personal preference.
- In the case of surrogate McKenna West, the intended parents demanded abortion after a treatable heart condition diagnosis, but West refused and fought to protect the baby.
- Courts and intended parents ultimately restricted West's autonomy (barring her from contact with the baby) while still enforcing custody to the same parents who had demanded the abortion.
- This contradicts the 'bodily autonomy' framework since it shows that a contract can override a surrogate's choice to continue a pregnancy, not just her choice to abort.
- The unborn child has a detectable heartbeat by six weeks, suggesting the child has bodily autonomy/rights that are ignored in both abortion and surrogacy contexts.
- Surrogacy more broadly exploits vulnerable women and commodifies children, denying children's natural rights to life and to their biological parents.
- Abortion advocacy and surrogacy practice are ideologically linked in devaluing both fetal life and women's true autonomy when it conflicts with commercial or contractual interests.
Assumptions
- That the 'her body, her choice' slogan is meant to be an absolute, universal principle rather than one specifically about the pregnant woman's right to abortion access (not necessarily her right to refuse abortion demands from others).
- That the existence of contractual abortion clauses in surrogacy agreements is representative of mainstream pro-choice ideology, rather than a separate contractual/legal issue.
- That fetal heartbeat detection is equivalent to full bodily autonomy or personhood rights.
- That surrogacy and abortion are philosophically and morally equivalent issues.
- That the intended parents' initial demand for abortion negates their subsequent claims of caring for the child's welfare, implying insincerity rather than a change of heart or complex circumstances.
- That court restrictions on the surrogate's contact with the baby is evidence of an anti-autonomy stance for women in general, rather than a specific custody/parental rights determination.