Arizona Revised Statutes § 25-218 prohibits entering, inducing, arranging, or assisting a surrogate-parentage contract and treats the person who gives birth as the legal mother. A state appellate court held the statute unconstitutional as applied to a genetic intended mother, which supports a parentage remedy in some cases but did not repeal the contract prohibition.
State law makes some surrogacy agreements void, prohibited, or available only through a narrow pathway that requires specialized review.
A compensated or uncompensated surrogate-parentage contract is prohibited and cannot be treated as an enforceable Arizona agreement. Soos v. Superior Court opened a route to rebut maternity in its genetic-intended-mother setting, not a general statutory safe harbor for gestational contracts.
Arizona has no lawful surrogacy-agreement eligibility framework. A genetic connection can be central to rebutting the statute's parentage presumptions; the route for an unmarried or non-genetic intended parent is materially less certain and may require adoption or another post-birth proceeding.
Courts may enter pre-birth parentage orders in some genetic gestational-surrogacy matters based on Soos and later trial-court practice, but no statute guarantees that procedure. Donor-assisted or non-genetic intended-parent cases require a carefully planned post-birth or adoption alternative.
Do not describe Arizona as having authorized gestational-surrogacy contracts merely because courts have granted parentage relief in some cases.
The decision protected a genetic intended mother's ability to establish maternity; it did not broadly validate every contract or family configuration.
If the carrier is married, § 25-218 creates a presumption involving the spouse that the parentage proceeding must resolve.
Sequence matters. Use these steps to prepare for a conversation with qualified assisted-reproduction professionals.
Before any matching, agreement, or Arizona-based assistance, obtain advice from Arizona counsel about § 25-218's prohibition, whether Soos supports a petition on the planned genetics, and what adoption or post-birth route is available.
Arizona has no lawful surrogacy-agreement eligibility framework. A genetic connection can be central to rebutting the statute's parentage presumptions; the route for an unmarried or non-genetic intended parent is materially less certain and may require adoption or another post-birth proceeding.
Coordinate the clinic, surrogate screening, insurance review, independent attorneys, and all required signatures before medication or embryo transfer. A compensated or uncompensated surrogate-parentage contract is prohibited and cannot be treated as an enforceable Arizona agreement. Soos v. Superior Court opened a route to rebut maternity in its genetic-intended-mother setting, not a general statutory safe harbor for gestational contracts.
Courts may enter pre-birth parentage orders in some genetic gestational-surrogacy matters based on Soos and later trial-court practice, but no statute guarantees that procedure. Donor-assisted or non-genetic intended-parent cases require a carefully planned post-birth or adoption alternative.
Review the linked statutes, court materials, public guidance, and clearly identified practice sources as a starting point for current legal review.
Laws, court practices, and local filing procedures can change. This page provides general educational information, not legal advice. Consult independent assisted-reproduction counsel licensed in the relevant state before relying on it.
Choose a city to open its local resource page.
