If a negotiation is suffering due to a stereotype, especially one regarding an attribute as immutable as gender or race, then the target of the stereotype needs to be strong enough to remove themselves from the negotiation, rather than forging ahead at all cost. 


Up to the late twentieth century, surrogacy without physical sexual contact (and presumably, its residual emotional effect on a marriage or relationship) was thought impossible. For the last thirty to forty years, the use of assisted reproductive technologies such as in-vitro fertilization, intrauterine insemination, and gamete donation has opened up a world of fertility to couples who would have otherwise remained barren or dependent upon traditional adoption procedures in order to become parents. These technologies are especially controversial when used in conjunction with a surrogate, or gestational carrier. A multitude of legal issues are raised when a couple asks a third party to conceive, carry, and bear a child on their behalf. In fact, potential parents often find themselves beyond the legal pale in most states if they determine that they wish to use a surrogate to achieve parenthood. 


	This paper will address the legal status and rights of both traditional and gestational surrogates, specifically with regard to their contractual rights. In the United States, there are a number of conflicting attitudes, statutes, and other factors which contribute to a surrogate’s status at any given time and in any given place in the country. Society in general seems to be more accepting of surrogacy in general, however lawmakers have been slow and inconsistent in codifying or regulating surrogacy as a practice consistent with legitimate family building. From traditional moral ideals to the idea of bodily integrity, a number of issues arise in this particular policy debate. Discussion over a surrogate’s rights is often left behind, favoring the rights of both the intended parents and the children resultant from the arrangement. 


	American lawmakers must strive to clear up the gray areas that arise at the crossroads that is assisted reproductive technology law. Societal beliefs notwithstanding, basic legal issues such as contract theory, application of family codes, and the right to privacy of a surrogate are left in the hands of our current jurisprudence, the basis of which generally fails to consider the construction of a legally recognized family as anything other than a married heterosexual couple who produces mutual biological children. This paper will focus on the origins of the so-called moral limitations of surrogacy, as well as a surrogate’s right to contract and be compensated for services. It also looks at a very recent and public case study involving a famous couple and their choice of surrogacy. The conclusion will offer the beginnings of a solution to the tenuous legal ground upon which surrogacy in the United States currently stands.


	Surrogacy is not currently federally codified. Because of this, the legal status of a surrogate varies from state to state. 