Lady Gaga, Lena Dunham and surrogacy: Why isn’t it causing a scandal in the United States?

All three are well-known, globally recognized, and outstanding women in their fields. All three became mothers just days ago, almost simultaneously. All three had children without giving birth to them: one adopted, two used a surrogate. And all three, despite their different methods and the ways they told their stories, received the same warm congratulations. But are the three cases the same? In the United States, for a large majority, the answer is yes.

On September 12 it became public, thanks to paparazzi photos, that singer Lady Gaga had become a mother to her first child; days later it emerged that the child was born via a surrogate. Next came Lena Dunham. The actor and writer said in a Vogue piece on September 16 that she had become a mother to her first daughter through surrogacy, the method that involves using another woman’s body to carry a baby. The following day, Millie Bobby Brown announced she had become a mother to her second child by adoption, as she had with her first. In the Instagram profile photo she posted — where she showed the child’s hand — the Stranger Things actor, who has more than 70 million followers, disabled comments. Was Brown perhaps afraid of a torrent of criticism?

Maybe. But, as happened when her first daughter arrived last summer, scrutiny would likely have focused more on her youth (she is 22) than on the method used. That Brown adopted a child while Gaga and Dunham used a surrogate hardly sparked debate or conversation about the differences in method. The practice is legal and widespread in the United States, while in Spain it is not only illegal but has been defined as a form of violence against women since 2022. In Europe, commercial surrogacy is not legal either; altruistic surrogacy exists only in a few countries, such as Greece, Cyprus or Portugal.

The debate in the United States is a far cry from the firm stance taken in Europe. Why are the perspectives of the U.S. and the rest of the world so different? “We Americans are more comfortable with the market and pure, unadulterated capitalism,” observes Professor Arthur Caplan, a specialist in public health and bioethics and professor emeritus at New York University, in a video call with EL PAÍS.

For example, Lady Gaga has for years expressed her desire to be a mother and has now, in a notably discreet way for the public persona she usually projects, fulfilled that wish. She has given few explanations; nor has anyone asked for them. Dunham’s case is more complex. A declared feminist with reproductive health problems, she has been one of the voices of her generation and a fervent follower of the recently deceased Gloria Steinem.

But Steinem opposed surrogacy. When New York considered legalizing it in 2019, she penned a long, critical letter: “The danger here is not the use of altruistic surrogacy to create a loving family, which is legal in New York now, but the state legalizing the commercial and profit-driven reproductive surrogacy industry. As has been seen here and in other countries, this harms and endangers women in the process, especially those who feel that they have few or no economic alternatives. Under this bill, women in economic need become commercialized vessels for rent, and the fetuses they carry become the property of others.”

Those words, which seem to guide both the law and much of the thinking in Europe, have not taken hold in the United States. A few outlets have questioned the methods used by Dunham and Gaga and many others.

For Caplan, this deep ethical and conceptual gulf between the two sides of the Atlantic has another explanation. The American people, born of immigration and the mixing of peoples, have a stronger taste for genetics — “to know who you are” — than Europeans, whose roots are clearer.

“It is very strong on the idea that your properties, your traits, your abilities all come from your genes. And not very much comes from the surrogate, except it’s kind of an oven, but all the ingredients are in the sperm and the egg and the embryo. That is not the European view, which gives more weight to the surrogate mother’s contribution, the bond during pregnancy, the chemical influences that reach the baby… And I think there is truth to that. I think Americans go too far on genetic determinism,” Caplan says, while still expressing doubts and calling not for a ban on surrogacy, but for better regulation of a practice that has grown exponentially in recent decades.

Caplan, who for years headed ethical medicine at NYU’s Grossman School of Medicine, says the percentage of babies born in the United States via surrogacy is increasing, especially among people with substantial financial resources. The process is expensive, with costs that easily exceed $100,000, and the women who carry the pregnancies receive compensation. In a country without public healthcare, where hospital care is prohibitively expensive, many families pay off debts thanks to that sizable sum of money.

This fits with the industry’s meteoric growth. According to a Fortune study, based on data from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, embryo transfers for surrogacy tripled between 2010 and 2019. The industry is growing at 6% a year, generating nearly $176 million in 2022 and is estimated to exceed $303 million in 2031. Only one of the 50 states, Louisiana, bans it entirely. Arizona, Indiana and Nebraska do not permit surrogacy contracts, yet the practice continues. In the other 46 states it is legal, according to a map created by the association Creative Family Connections, which helps people seeking such services.

The author of some 30 books and nearly 900 scientific papers, Professor Caplan — who supports altruistic surrogacy and considers himself “very European” in his approach — believes it will be difficult to achieve a regulated status. “More of the world may ban surrogacy because of abuses, but it won’t be banned in the U.S.,” he predicts. At most, and what he sees as necessary, laws could be passed about agencies or the requirements all parties must meet, such as clean criminal records. “I’m not sure the U.S. model is the right one, but what it needs is some regulation. It looks too much like a free market. It looks like livestock trading.”

Celebrity surrogacy

Joining Dunham and Lady Gaga are a multitude of public figures who have used this method: Kim and Khloé Kardashian, Ricky Martin, Elton John, Robert De Niro and Sarah Jessica Parker have all had children via surrogacy. Nobody questions it. Not even the most publicly feminist and progressive celebrities seem interested in entering the debate. That is the case of writer Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie, author of the widely read We Should All Be Feminists (2014). A mother of a nine-year-old, she revealed in February 2025 that she had had twins the previous year. On the podcast #WithChude, she said the births were via surrogacy and that, at 47, she wouldn’t lie about it.

Ngozi, a Nigerian who divides her time between her homeland and the United States, said then that surrogacy can be done responsibly. “Critics say you can’t rent a woman’s body, that it’s dehumanizing, but I think how it’s done matters. It can be ethical,” she said, adding that she has “zero regrets.”

Another high-profile case is Ms. Rachel, one of the most influential YouTubers in the United States, who has a channel with 21 million followers, a Netflix series, books and a commercial brand. A teacher, Rachel Accurso is one of the few celebrities also known for her activism. She has supported progressive figures such as Mayor Zohran Mamdani and served on his initial committee when he took office. She has spoken out for LGBTQ+ rights, against the war in Gaza and against ICE mass detentions, especially of children — positions uncommon in the U.S. With a son aged eight, at 43 she became a mother again in 2025 via surrogacy, citing medical problems that prevented her from carrying a pregnancy. She drew no criticism.

Cradle of capitalism

In the cradle of capitalism, the class differences that money reveals can sometimes be scandalous. Many will remember the image of Khloé Kardashian, one of the members of the reality television clan, lying in the bed where another woman had given birth hours earlier, holding the newborn — a photo that sparked huge controversy and was one of the few moments when the debate did surface.

Against this media construction around celebrities, analysis emerges on how society perceives surrogacy. For Somjit Barat, PhD in marketing and a specialist in ethics, surrogacy and international trade at Pennsylvania State University, those celebrity announcements “provide opportunities to raise awareness.”

“Whether that happens depends partly on how journalists, commentators, and audiences frame the conversation. Rather than questioning individual celebrities’ reproductive decisions, I believe the more productive discussion concerns the systems within which surrogacy takes place,” he says, arguing that the discussion should consider “whether the interests and rights of everyone involved receive adequate consideration.”

Barat also points to another issue in the U.S.–Europe comparison: “How feminism, childbirth, surrogacy and other women-centered issues provoke strong emotions and intense public debate in different cultures.”

In that sense, the professor emphasizes the media’s role in creating legitimacy: “When a celebrity announces the arrival of a child through surrogacy, media coverage frequently emphasizes the emotional aspects of parenthood, personal fulfillment, and the celebration of a new family,” Barat reflects, which ends up “diverting attention from the broader ethical and commercial dimensions of surrogacy.”

Sign up for our weekly newsletter to get more English-language news coverage from EL PAÍS USA Edition