The rise of 'social' surrogacy: The women choosing not to carry their own babies for fear of hurting their careers or ruining their bodies

• San Diego-based fertility doctor Lorni Arnold says her patients have included a socialite who 'didn't want to get fat' and a runner with an upcoming marathon
• The approximate total cost of surrogacy including medical, agency and legal fees is $100,000
  

By Margot Peppers

Published: 14:16 EDT, 16 April 2014 | Updated: 14:21 EDT, 16 April 2014

It used to be that surrogacy was considered an option exclusively for infertile couples, but it appears more and more women are doing it for less medically urgent reasons.

According to Elle Magazine, 'social surrogacy' is on the rise, with mothers choosing not to carry their baby themselves in order not to upset their work life or 'ruin' their bodies.

'I call these cases designer surrogacy,' said San Diego-based fertility doctor Lorni Arnold, whose patients have included a socialite 'who didn't want to get fat' and a runner about to do a marathon.

To have or not to have: 'Social surrogacy' is on the rise, with more and more mothers choosing not to carry their baby themselves in order not to upset their work life or 'ruin' their bodies

Dr Arnold explained that pregnancy can also be a financial hindrance to women, since it can mean a months-long pause in their career.

'Some women work right up to the moment they deliver, but others can be bedridden for several months,' she said.

That was the reason wedding photographer Mari Smith, who chose not to reveal her real name to the magazine, began considering surrogacy.

At 36, Mari had been putting off having a baby with her husband because business was finally booming, and she couldn't bear to risk wrecking it.

What's more, she was working 60 hours a week to build her brand and says she simply didn't have time for pregnancy, much less potential complications like morning sickness or being put on bed rest.

With her baby clock ticking louder and louder, she spoke with a clinical psychologist friend named Jhutty who owns a surrogacy agency called Conceptual Options.

Frustrated with all the complicated fertility math and ovulation tracking involved in trying to perfectly time her own pregnancy, Mari joked: 'I wish I could just use a surrogate.'

Surprisingly, her friend was encouraging, and what started as a joke became an option she was determined to carry out.

Even though the approximate total cost of surrogacy is a staggering $100,000, Mari sees it as the best and most reliable way for her and her husband to finally expand their family.

And the fact that childbirth itself is painful and can affect the body certainly was something of a factor.

Indeed, after visiting a friend who told her she'd been ripped 'head to toe' after delivering her ten-pound baby, Mari was horrified.

'Oh God!' she wrote in an e-mail to Jhutty. 'I don't want to go through that if I don't have to.'

Risk of judgement: Rumors abounded when Sarah Jessica Parker announced in 2009 that she and Matthew Broderick were 'happily anticipating the birth of their twin daughters... with the generous help of a surrogate'

Mari is one of a growing number of women who are choosing not to carry their own baby, even if they are medically capable of doing so.

While it may seem somewhat morally questionable, the guidelines for surrogacy are vague and not always binding.

Indeed, according to the American Society for Reproductive Medicine, surrogacy should be used only 'when a true medical condition precludes the intended parent from carrying a pregnancy or would pose a significant risk of death or harm to the woman or the fetus.'

But the definition of 'harm' can vary from doctor to doctor, with some saying psychological setbacks - like the fear of being pregnant - are reason enough.

Vicken Sahakian, a doctor at Pacific Fertility Center in Los Angeles, says he's overseen about 20 'social' cases.

'They're for reasons most people would find offensive,' he explained, adding: 'I don't ask these patients too many questions because I don't want them to feel judged.'

Celebrity mom: Nicole Kidman faced some skepticism after she and Keith Urban paid a gestational carrier to give birth to their daughter Faith Margaret (left) in 2010

And judgement is certainly an issue for women who opt for surrogacy, with some people assuming they're doing it to maintain their figure or work life.

Rumors abounded, for instance, when Sarah Jessica Parker announced in 2009 that she and Matthew Broderick were 'happily anticipating the birth of their twin daughters... with the generous help of a surrogate'.

And Nicole Kidman faced some skepticism after she and Keith Urban paid a gestational carrier to give birth to their daughter Faith in 2008.

Of course, both of these women were in their forties at the time, when pregnancy is significantly more dangerous for both the mother and the fetus.

For Mari, the risk of judgement by her peers or her family members (her husband's mother is far from impressed to have a 'stranger' carry her grandchild) are outweighed by the benefits of surrogacy.

'I could be out [of work] three or four months,' she said of conceiving naturally. 'People could forget about me. I have to be out there constantly producing and being visible.'