Connect with us

International

Chinese Couple Renting American Women’s Wombs Exposes Dark Side Of Surrogacy Industry

Published

10 minute read

 

From the Daily Caller News Foundation

By Katelynn Richardson

A surrogacy scandal involving a Chinese couple under investigation for alleged child abuse is drawing attention to lax regulations allowing anyone — including foreign nationals — to hire an American woman to deliver their child.

Police initiated a child abuse investigation into 38-year-old Silvia Zhang and 65-year-old Guojun Xuan after a two-month old in their care was hospitalized with a head injury in May, a local law enforcement official confirmed to the Daily Caller News Foundation. The Los Angeles Department of Children and Family Services (DCFS) subsequently removed 21 children from their custody, including some born from surrogates who worked with an agency called Mark Surrogacy.

Surrogacy agencies, operating with minimal legal accountability, are able to recruit American women via social media to carry their babies, frequently for individuals or couples living overseas.

The Mark Surrogacy case “exemplifies how lack of regulation, industry opacity, and power imbalances can facilitate exploitation” for both mothers and children, Center for Bioethics & Culture Network (CBC) Executive Director Kallie Fell told the DCNF.

“It raises concerns about potential trafficking, misuse of U.S. birthright citizenship, and the commodification of both women’s bodies and children,” she said. “Overall, the case underscores the urgent need for stronger laws, better protections for surrogates and children, and clearer ethical boundaries in the surrogacy industry.”

It is unclear at this point how many of the children in the Southern California couple’s home were born through surrogacy, Arcadia Police Department Lieutenant Kollin Cieadlo told the DCNF. Several women who had babies for the couple have come forward by sharing their experiences in surrogacy review groups on Facebook.

‘Wake-Up Call’

Kayla Elliott, who was a surrogate for Zhang and Xuan, eventually ended up in a group chat with five other women who carried for the same couple, she told Fell in a July 3 interview.

“There was actual, die-hard like picture proof of all these women holding their surrobabies with the same mom standing right next to them,” Elliott said. “Some of them were within weeks of each other.”

Elliott is now seeking custody of the baby girl she delivered.

“I’m reaching out with a heartfelt request for support as I seek legal placement of the baby girl I delivered as a surrogate,” Elliott wrote on her GoFundMe. “Due to unexpected circumstances, babygirl, along with many others, have been placed in foster care.”

Several other surrogates intend to seek custody of the children they carried, one woman who said she worked with Mark Surrogacy told the DCNF.

The situation “should be a wake-up call about the deeply imbalanced priorities in the U.S. surrogacy system,” Emma Waters, policy analyst at the Heritage Foundation’s Center for Technology and the Human Person, told the DCNF.

“California lawmakers have designed surrogacy laws to eliminate nearly all barriers for intended parents, allowing them to have as many children as they wish with minimal legal oversight or accountability for the well-being of the children,” she said. “What’s most alarming is that this couple didn’t break any California laws when they contracted these children through surrogacy over just a few years.”

Mark Surrogacy’s registration has been inactive since June 13, California records show. Its website is also no longer live.

The Chinese couple was initially arrested for alleged child endangerment and neglect, but the investigation is ongoing and no charges have been officially brought, Cieadlo told the DCNF. Xuan and Zhang were arrested May 9 and released May 13, according to Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department records.

“We anticipate filing charges against the mother and father within two to three weeks,” Cieadlo said. “Our primary focus is on the child abuse investigation. We have not investigated the surrogacy side of this case, but we will investigate that with the assistance of the FBI.”

An email associated with Mark Surrogacy told the DCNF that “recent media reports have published false or misleading information without verifying it with us, causing serious distress and harm to our family, our reputation, and our child.”

“As the matter is currently under judicial proceedings, we respect the rule of law and are actively engaging in the legal process,” the email stated. “To safeguard the fairness of the case and the privacy of those involved, we are unable to accept interviews or comment on specific issues at this time.”

The U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Central District of California declined to comment. The FBI did not respond to requests for comment.

“While we recognize the public’s interest in the details about the lives of children and families who come to our attention, DCFS is bound by state confidentiality laws that prevent the department from discussing potential involvement with families,” a DCFS spokesperson said in a statement to the DCNF. “These laws are in place to protect children and families from further emotional distress while delicate family matters are resolved.”

‘Looking For A California Surrogate’

Social media “is now one of the most common recruitment channels for egg donors and surrogates,” Fell told the DCNF.

In surrogacy groups on Facebook, it’s common for international individuals — from China and elsewhere — to request U.S. surrogates.

“Couple from Sichuan, China who have two good quality embryos in an IVF center in San Diego, CA are looking for a California surrogate,” one August 2022 post in a Facebook group called “Want To Be A Surrogate Mother” states. “First time surrogate will be paid a base pay of $40,000, on top of that monthly allowance, maternity clothing, travel allowance etc. Can earn up to $60k – $65k.”

Requests for American surrogates on Facebook.

Requests for American surrogates on Facebook. Credit: Screenshot/Facebook

Elliott says she was contacted by Mark Surrogacy via direct messages after posting in surrogate match groups on Facebook

“We kind of started chatting through Facebook Messenger,” she told Fell. “And that’s how I came to meet this agency.”

One-third of surrogate pregnancies in the U.S. are for international parents, according to an April 2024 study from the American Society of Reproductive Medicine (ASRM). These intended parents are most likely to be from China, where surrogacy is banned, at 41.7%.

While the precise number of children born to foreign nationals through surrogacy is difficult to determine, foreign nationals went through 4,713 “gestational carrier cycles,” or attempts to implant an embryo, in 2020, according to ASRM data.

Agencies tailor their services in ways that reflect these demands, including by hiring case coordinators who speak Chinese.

When intended parents were unable to travel to the United States during COVID-19, the owner of one surrogacy agency said the company “hired a professional nanny service and rented a living space in Los Angeles where the babies could be cared for while Powers of Attorney were procured.”

“Eventually, these amazing nannies flew back to China with the babies, quarantined in China for two weeks, and then eventually reunited them with their international parents,” GSHC Surrogacy owner Jia Shen said in an interview.

Fell wants to end surrogacy in the U.S. — or at least outlaw commercial surrogacy and international arrangements.

“Organ donation does not allow the exchange of money, nor should an industry creating children,” she told the DCNF. “Woman’s bodies should not be for ‘rent’ and children should not be reduced to a purchased commodity.”

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

Daily Caller

New Analysis Blows Massive Hole In Climate Catastrophe Narrative

Published on

 

From the Daily Caller News Foundation

By Audrey Streb

The Department of Energy (DOE) released a new scientific analysis on Tuesday finding that climate change is not humanity’s most existential threat and that emissions will not devastate the economy as climate alarmists have claimed for years.

Released as the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced that it is moving to repeal a cornerstone climate regulation, the report states that drastic energy policies are unlikely to effectively reverse climate change and could even potentially cause more harm than benefit. Authored by scientists including former Obama DOE Under Secretary for Science Steven Koonin and climatologist John Christy, the report undermines the prevailing narrative of climate catastrophe often touted by Democrats and legacy media calling for a rapidtaxpayer-funded green energy transition.

“Climate change is real, and it deserves attention. But it is not the greatest threat facing humanity. That distinction belongs to global energy poverty,” Energy Secretary Chris Wright wrote in the report’s foreword. “What I’ve found is that media coverage often distorts the science. Many people — even well-meaning ones — walk away with a view of climate change that is exaggerated or incomplete.”

DOE Critical Review of Impacts of GHG Emissions on the US Climate July 2025 by audreystreb on Scribd

The report, titled “A Critical Review of Impacts of Greenhouse Gas Emissions on the U.S. Climate,” states that the impact of global warming on the U.S. economy is expected to be “negligible.”

“CO2-induced warming might be less damaging economically than commonly believed, and excessively aggressive mitigation policies could prove more detrimental than beneficial,” the report reads. “There is evidence that scenarios widely-used in the impacts literature have overstated observed and likely future emission trends.”

Impacts of policies mandating significant cuts on greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions are also projected to be “negligible” because local emissions regulations are unable to significantly slow the global effects of climate change, according to the report.

“Even the most aggressive regulatory actions on GHG emissions from U.S. vehicles cannot be expected to remediate alleged climate dangers to the U.S. public on any measurable scale,” the report reads.

The report states that it is “naive” to assume that extreme weather events like hurricanes or tornadoes are brought about by human impacts on the climate. Furthermore, it states that “most types of extreme weather exhibit no statistically significant long-term trends over the available historical record.”

“These green energy policies hurt people more than the climate risk,” meteorologist Chris Martz told the Daily Caller News Foundation, noting that the report indicates most extreme weather events have not increased over time — and some have even decreased. “Forcing intermittent and unreliable energy on people is going to lead to a poorer standard of living and a poorer quality of life.”

The report and the proposed EPA action to rescind the 2009 Endangerment Finding will be open to public comment, which Wright notes in the foreword is a part of “honest scrutiny and scientific transparency [that] should be at the heart of our policymaking.”

The five authors who drafted the report included several scientists and one economist: Koonin, Christy, . Wright noted that he asked the “diverse team of independent experts” to summarize what is currently known about climate science and how it translates to the U.S.

Christy told the DCNF that “this is not the final product as we are gearing up to address the many public comments that will come in – and we will fix any mistakes we may have made for the final version.”

“There has been a noticeable lack of evidence-based information feeding the climate narrative, and we wanted to bring that to bear in this report. It will surprise many folks I suppose to see the lack of trends in various types of extreme weather after being constantly told their occurrences are increasing,” Christy told the DNCF. “Make no mistake, CO2 is a greenhouse gas that all things being equal will exert a warming influence.  The evidence we present is that the impact of that warming is not a developing crisis as the world continues to develop wealth and prosperity.”

Christy also told the DCNF that “without energy life is brutal and short,” noting that meeting energy demand is necessary for human health.

Other energy sector experts have pointed to the DOE report as a landmark release that deals a major blow to the climate alarmism narrative.

“Much to the chagrin of climate ‘panicans,’ Secretary Chris Wright assembled five credible scientists to publish this seminal and important report,” Gabriella Hoffman, director of the Center for Energy & Conservation at the Independent Women’s Forum, told the DCNF. “Let’s clear the air: The science on CO2 isn’t settled. And it’s worthy to have a debate about whether or not it’s actually harmful to human health and welfare. As the authors noted, fixating on CO2 — a component that only makes up 0.04% of the atmosphere — might have more adverse negative impacts than CO2 itself.”

Continue Reading

Banks

Financial officers from 21 states urge financial institutions to completely abandon ESG

Published on

From The Center Square

By

“BlackRock is playing a game of deceit. Fink and his team are trying to say all the right things to conservatives while quietly doubling down on their activist agenda behind the scenes.”

A group of 26 financial officers from 21 states sent letters to 18 major financial institutions this week, warning them to abandon environmental, social, and governance (ESG) practices if they wish to continue doing business with their states.

The letters said ESG has undermined the traditional fiduciary duty that firms owe their clients, focusing solely on financial return, and instead prioritizes advancing political agendas.

“Fiduciary duty has long been a critical safeguard that facilitated efficient capital allocation grounded in financial merit rather than political ideology,” the letter said. “But that clarity is being diluted under the banner of so-called ‘long-term risk mitigation,’ where speculative assumptions about the future, like climate change catastrophe, are used to justify ideological conclusions today.”

Signers include state treasurers, auditors, and comptrollers from states like Alabama, Arizona, Florida, Louisiana, Missouri, North Carolina, Pennsylvania and Utah. BlackRock CEO Larry Fink and 17 other financial leaders were recipients of the joint letter. Others include executives from Vanguard, Fidelity, JP Morgan, Goldman Sachs, and State Street.

The letter said that while some firms have started leaving global climate coalitions and reducing ESG-related proxy votes, the state financial officers want “durable assurances” that fiduciary duty, not politics, drives investment decisions.

“While some firms have recently taken encouraging steps, such as withdrawing from global climate coalitions and scaling back ESG rhetoric and proxy votes, and some states have permitted incremental reintegration, more work must be done,” the letter said. “The number one issue is a recommitment to the foundational principles of fiduciary duty, loyalty, objectivity, and financial focus.”

The move comes after Texas removed BlackRock from its blacklist earlier this month and resumed investing with the firm – a move that drew criticism from others still pushing back against ESG. The letter indicates that many states won’t follow suit.

“Financial institutions wishing to compete for our states’ business should provide durable assurances that their practices align with these principles,” the letter said. “Our responsibility is to ensure public assets are managed in the best financial interest of beneficiaries and taxpayers.”

O.J. Oleka, president of the State Financial Officers Foundation, said the states are right to demand proof that ESG is no longer a factor in investing for these companies.

“Actions always speak louder than words. Requiring America’s financial giants to prove their independence from woke ideology with concrete steps before doing business with a state’s dollars is fully necessary and just makes sense,” Oleka said. “These financial officers are doing the right thing for their states and the taxpayers whose financial security they’ve been entrusted to protect.”

Will Hild, executive director of Consumers’ Research, also praised the letter.

“BlackRock is playing a game of deceit,” Hild said. “Fink and his team are trying to say all the right things to conservatives while quietly doubling down on their activist agenda behind the scenes.”

Continue Reading

Trending

X