Surrogacy legal battle revives abortion debate

And a Massachusetts law expanding access to abortion later in pregnancy stirred controversy.

Last week, a surrogate gave birth after denying the intended parents’ request that she receive an abortion due to a fetal anomaly, contributing to ongoing debate about the ethics of abortion. Conversation about abortion continued in response to a Massachusetts law expanding access to abortion later in pregnancy, with some commenters debating the medical necessity.

Given these discussions, communicators may recirculate information about local abortion laws and explain why some people may need abortions later in pregnancy.

---

What’s trending nationally in conversations about reproductive health

A surrogate who refused to terminate a pregnancy at the parents’ request after the fetus was diagnosed with a life-threatening heart condition gave birth in Texas last week. Her attempt to gain custody of the infant sparked an ongoing legal battle that’s gaining attention online. The infant’s intended parents in California say the surrogate violated her contract and argued in court that the surrogate has no right to custody. In response, social media users debated whether the surrogate should have parental rights and whether abortion is ever ethical when there is a life-threatening or fatal fetal diagnosis, echoing conversations from previous weeks.

On August 10, Massachusetts Governor Maura Healey signed the Prioritizing Patient Access to Care Act, which allows Massachusetts doctors to decide whether an abortion later in pregnancy is appropriate. (Previously, Massachusetts only allowed abortions after 24 weeks to protect the life, physical health, or mental health of the patient or because of certain fetal anomalies.) The law generated attention online among anti-abortion groups, with one X post garnering approximately 26.6 million views as of August 19. Many posts framed the law as allowing abortion “up to birth” or legalizing infanticide. Some pushed back, emphasizing that abortion later in pregnancy may be needed during medical emergencies and applauded the law for improving access to potentially lifesaving care.

---

Recommendations for public health professionals

The Infodemiology.com team will provide messaging recommendations in response to some of the trending narratives outlined above. These helpful tips can be used when creating content, updating web and FAQ pages, and developing strategy for messaging about reproductive health. 

Given ongoing discussion about fetal anomalies and abortion, communicators may continue sharing information about their state’s abortion laws. Messaging may highlight the Repro Legal Helpline, a free resource that connects people with lawyers who can answer questions about abortion, miscarriage, and birth; AbortionFinder.org, a database of reputable abortion providers; and Plan C, which offers information about accessing abortion pills by mail.

Conversations about abortions later in pregnancy often generate intense debate and false claims about “legalizing infanticide.” Messaging may explain that abortions at or after 21 weeks represent only 1 percent of abortions in the U.S. as of 2024 and and may occur for a range of reasons, including serious fetal diagnoses, risks to the pregnant person’s health, and barriers that delayed access to abortion care. Messaging may clarify that abortion refers to ending a pregnancy and that killing an infant after birth is illegal. Communicators should be aware that phrases like “late-term abortion” or “post-birth abortion,” which frequently arise in these conversations, are not medically recognized.