代理孕母最大的倫理爭議的產生主要在於其將傳統的生、育、養合而為一的母親身分，轉成可以各自獨立的情況。然而「代孕」對代理孕母和委託夫妻都不會是一個輕鬆的過程，代孕必然是不孕夫妻最後的希望，代孕合法化是讓處於生育弱勢的不孕夫妻得到補天道不足的機會。本文嘗試由倫理分析「代孕」並不違反人性尊嚴，在尊重代理孕母的自律、代理孕母應擁有優先的親子權利，並保護代孕所生子女、保障委託夫妻權利的前提之下，完善規範的代孕機制具可行性。
本文認為完善的代孕機制，主要是尊重代理孕母的自律權，這需要確定其確實得到足夠時間的深思熟慮後自願代孕，即充分的詢詢同意原則的運用，因此代孕仲介組織將扮演重要的角色。而本文主張代孕除必要的醫療、檢查等費用，代孕應有酬，除肯定代理孕母的辛勞，也明確化其權利義務，藉由「代孕人工生殖法」的規範與代孕仲介組織的連繫溝通之下，代理孕母與委託夫妻簽訂代孕契約，代孕可以是最低風險、最小傷害的機制。以英美兩個代孕合法化的國家為例，代孕不成功的案例約為1%，我們應該努力的是將這1%降至最低，而不是否定99%的成功率。即使一般的自然生殖，也存在母親生產困難、胎兒畸型等風險，我們並不因此而禁止自然生殖，而是致力於將傷害的可能性減至最低。本文的研究除對代孕機制予以倫理分析，並建議代孕仲介組織應提供的服務，最後依生命倫理學在代孕議題上的多方衡量，試擬一份代孕契約，期為代理孕母的開放，提出一較圓融的可行方式。

The root of the controversy of surrogate motherhood comes from the shivering of the traditional motherhood into three separate process: conceiving, gestating and raising the child. However, surrogacy is no easy matter for the infertile couple and the surrogate mother. Surrogacy is usually the last hope of the infertile couple to have their own child. This dissertation argues that surrogacy has no infringement on human dignity. With due respect to surrogate mother’s autonomy, her priority to keep custody of her child, due protection of the legal status of the child born, and ensuring the right of the infertile couple, I believe that a morally acceptable surrogacy arrangement is enforceable.
Respect of the autonomy of the surrogate mother is tantamount to the success of surrogacy. The surrogate mother must be given sufficient time to deliberate about carrying a child for the infertile couple. It is proscribed by the principle of informed consent and in this respect, the agency of surrogacy plays a very important part. This dissertation advocates that the infertile couple should pay for the service of surrogacy and the expense must include reward beside necessary medical fees, in order to recognize the painstaking labor of surrogate mother and define her right and obligation clearly. By means of the “Surrogacy Arrangement” and the agency for surrogacy in proper coordination between surrogate mother and infertile couple, the surrogate contract could be an arrangement of least risk and least harm to all party. The failure rate of surrogacy is about 1% in United Kingdom and United States, what we should strive for is to reduce the failure rate, but not to deny the successful rate of 99%. Although natural reproduction still has risk of difficulty in delivery, in giving birth to deformed babies, we do not forbid natural reproduction, but make more effort to reduce the harm resulted. After an in-depth analysis of surrogacy, I suggest that the service of surrogacy should provide and built upon bioethical consideration of surrogacy. I give a draft of a surrogacy contract. I hope this essay will provide a satisfactory and enforceable method and policy for surrogacy.

參考文獻：
I、中文
(一)書籍
‧三民書局印行 (2000)：〈〈基本六法〉〉，台北.三民書局出版
．刁筱華譯(2003)：〈〈女性主義思潮〉〉，台北.時報文化出版
‧王仁宏、吳庚、蘇俊雄、謝在全編纂(2001)：〈〈月旦六法全書〉〉，台北.元照出版。
‧李瑞全(1999)：〈〈儒家生命倫理學〉〉，台北.鵝湖出版社。
‧孫森焱(1997)：〈〈民法債編總論〉〉，台北.作者發行。
‧黃慶明(2000)編：〈〈倫理學講義〉〉，台北.鵝湖出版社。
‧謝冰瑩、林明波、邱燮友、左松超註譯(1980)：〈〈新譯古文觀止〉〉，台北.三民書局印行
‧謝冰瑩、邱燮友、李洗金、賴炎元、劉正浩、陳滿銘編譯(2004)：〈〈新譯四書讀本〉〉，台北.三民書局印行，第五版
(二) 論文及期刊
‧李惠宗(2005)：〈死後取精—基本權與人性尊嚴的衝突？〉，〈〈月旦法學雜誌〉〉第126期，台北.元照出版
‧李從業、周承珍(2002)，〈代理孕母合法化--護理人員所面臨之照護困境及因應〉，〈〈護理雜誌〉〉第49卷第6期，台灣護理學會。
‧李瑞全(2002)：〈生命倫理學五十年〉(上)，〈〈鵝湖月刊〉〉第330期，pp.29-35
‧李瑞全(2003)：〈生命倫理學五十年〉(下)，〈〈鵝湖月刊〉〉第331期，pp.15-24
‧吳嘉苓(1999)：〈一九九九台灣女權報告，生殖自主篇〉，東吳大學張
佛泉人權研究中心：http://www.scu.edu.tw/hr/documentimgs/documents/d6_6.htm
‧胡幼慧(1997)，〈從「代理孕母」事件談婦女健康運動〉，〈〈醫望〉〉第23期，pp.120-122
‧孫效智(1997)：〈代理孕母的倫理與法律問題〉，〈〈應用倫理研究通
訊〉〉，第4期，中壢.中央大學出版。
．許樹珍(2003)，〈國內醫療照護體系中的一個具有新興挑戰性的角色—倫理諮詢員〉，〈〈應用倫理研究通訊〉〉，第25期，中壢.中央大學出版。
‧雷文玫(2002)，〈決定為人父母的範疇:剖析限制人工協助科技使用資格的權力關係〉，〈〈2002年台灣人權報告〉〉，pp.83-102，台北.前衛出版社出版。
‧雷文玫(1999)，〈兩對父母親的拔河：從父母子女關係之認定看近來代理孕母合法化爭議〉，〈〈月旦法學雜誌〉〉第52期，台北.元照出版。
‧ 劉仲冬(1997)：〈代理懷孕：女性及醫療社會觀〉，〈〈應用倫理研究通訊〉〉，第4期，中壢.中央大學出版。
‧陳美華(1999)：〈物化或解放—女性主義者關於代理孕母的爭論〉，〈〈月旦法學雜誌〉〉，第52期，台北.元照出版。
‧顏厥安(1997)，〈國家不應禁止代理孕母的法哲學與憲法學根據〉，〈〈應用倫理研究通訊〉〉，第4期，中壢.中央大學出版。
‧顏厥安(1997)，〈自由與倫理-由代理孕母的合法化問題談價值命題的論證〉，〈〈政大法學評論〉〉，第57期，台北.政治大學出版。
‧薛瑞元(1998)，〈代理孕母所生子女的身份認定-誰是他的母親？〉，〈〈月旦法學雜誌〉〉第38期，台北.元照出版。
‧薛瑞元(1999)，〈「代理孕母」的管制原則及措施〉，〈〈月旦法學雜誌〉〉，第52期，台北.元照出版。
(三) 學位論文
‧王英馨(2003)，〈〈以政策網絡途徑探討代理孕母政策〉〉，台北:世新大學行政管理學研究所碩士論文。
‧林伯殷(2003)，〈〈論癌末病人知情權〉〉，中壢.中央大學哲學研究所碩士論文。
‧楊佳祥(2003)，〈〈論人工生殖技術對我國親子關係法規範之衝擊〉〉，嘉義:中正大學法律研究所碩士論文。
‧陳鳳珠(2003)，〈〈代孕契約法律關係研究〉〉，台南:成功大學法律研究所碩士論文 。
‧陽佳君(2003)，〈〈論代理孕母所生子女法律地位〉〉，台南:成功大學法律研究所碩士論文。
‧鍾佩蓉(2004)，〈〈代理孕母與親子關係：一個倫理分析〉〉，中壢：中央大學哲學研究所碩士論文。
‧蘇坤成(1999)，〈〈論代孕契約之損害賠償〉〉，台北：國防管理學院法律研究所碩士論文。
II、英文
(一)書籍
‧Alpern , Kenneth D. ed.(1992),The Ethics of Reproductive Technology, New York:Oxford University Press。
‧Beauchamp,Tom L & James F. Childress (2001)，Principle of Biomedical Ethics：Oxford University Press,5 th edition
‧Beauchamp,Tom L& Leroy Walters ed.(2003)，Contemporary Issues in Bioethics: Wadsworth,a division of Thomson Learning,Inc. 5th edition
‧Buchanan,Allen & Dan W. Brock & Norman Daniels & Daniel Wikler (2000), From chance to choice--Genetics and Justice,Cambridge university press
‧Feldman, Fred(1978), Introductory Ethics, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, Prentice-Hall Inc., Englewood Cliffs,N.J.
‧Noddings,Nel.(1984),Caring,A feminine approach to ethics and moral education,University of California Press,Ltd.
‧Rachels, James(2003),The elements of moral philosophy：McGraw-Hill Company,Inc.,4th edition
‧Tong, Rosemarie(1989)，Feminist thought : A comprehensive introduction : Westview Press, Inc.
‧Purdy, Laura M.(1996),Reproducing Persons : issues in feminist bioethics, Cornell University Press
(二) 論文
‧Alpern, Kenneth D.(1992),”Genetic puzzles and stork stories: On the meaning and significance of having children” in in The Ethics of Reproductive Technology, ed. Kenneth D. Alpern , New York:Oxford University Press:pp.147-169。
‧Anderson, Elizabeth S.(1990), ”Is Women’s Labor a commodity ?” in Contemporary Issues in Bioethics, ed. Beauchamp,Tom L&Leroy Walters: Wadsworth, a division of Thomson Learning,Inc. 5th edition:pp.655-665
‧Andrews, Lori B(1988),”Surrogate motherhood: The challenge for feminists” in The Ethics of Reproductive Technology, ed. Kenneth D. Alpern , New York:Oxford University Press:pp.205-219。
‧Cotton,Kim(2000), “Surrogacy should pay” in British Medical Journal , Apr 2000；vol:320:pp.924-929，下載自BMJ Jourals網站: http://bmj.bmjjourals.com/
‧Jennings , Patrick (1998),” To protect all parties involved, surrogacy should be regulated and surrogate mothers should be compensated for their services”,下載自Patrick Jennings Law Office網站。
‧Kass,Leon(1997),”The wisdom of repugnance” in Contemporary Issues in Bioethics, ed. Beauchamp,Tom L& Leroy Walters: Wadsworth, a division of Thomson Learning,Inc. 6th edition:pp.603-617。
‧Keane, Noel P.(1980),”Legal Problems of Surrogate Motherhood” in The Ethics of Reproductive Technology, ed. Kenneth D. Alpern , New York:Oxford University Press:pp.269-316。
‧Ketchum, Sara Ann(1993) , “Selling babies and selling bodies.” in Moral Controversies, ed. Steven Jay Gold, Belmont, Calif.: Wadsworth publishing company：pp.70-77
‧Krimmel, Herbert T.(1988),”Surrogate Mother Arrangements from the perspective of the child.” in The Ethics of Reproductive Technology, ed. Kenneth D. Alpern , New York:Oxford University Press:pp.57-70。
‧Macklin, Ruth(1991),”Artificial Means of Reproduction and Our Understanding of the Family”, Contemporary Issues in Bioethics, ed. Beauchamp,Tom L&Leroy Walters: Wadsworth, a division of Thomson Learning,Inc. 5th edition:pp.612-618
‧Malm, H. M.(1993), “Commodification or compensation: A reply to Ketchum”, in Moral Controversies, ed. Steven Jay Gold, Belmont, Calif.: Wadsworth publishing company：pp.78-83.
‧Purdy, Laura M.(1987),” The Morality of New Reproducive Technologies ” in Reproducing Persons : issues in feminist bioethics, Cornell University Press : pp.171-181
‧Purdy, Laura M.(1989),”Surrogate Mothering:Exploitation or Empowerment ?” in Reproducing Persons : issues in feminist bioethics, Cornell University Press : pp.182-197
‧Purdy, Laura M.(1992),”Another Look at Contract Pregnancy” in Reproducing Persons : issues in feminist bioethics, Cornell University Press : pp.198-215
‧Purdy, Laura M.(1995),”Children of Choice: Whose children? At what cost? ” in Reproducing Persons : issues in feminist bioethics, Cornell University Press : pp. 216-238
‧Purdy, Laura M.(1996),”What can progress in reproductive technology mean for women ?” in Reproducing Persons : issues in feminist bioethics, Cornell University Press : pp. 75-87
‧Robertson, John A.(1983), ”Surrogate Motherhood: Not so novel after all” in The Ethics of Reproductive Technology, ed. Kenneth D. Alpern , New York:Oxford University Press:pp.45-56。
‧Robertson, John A.(1986),”Noncoital Reproduction and Procreative Liberty” in The Ethics of Reproductive Technology, ed. Kenneth D. Alpern , New York:Oxford University Press:pp.249-258
‧ Rothman, Barbara Katz (1989), ”Motherhood: Beyond Patriarchy” in Contemporary Issues in Bioethics, ed. Beauchamp,Tom L&Leroy Walters: Wadsworth, a division of Thomson Learning,Inc. 5th edition:pp.619-622
‧Sherwin, Susan (1987),”Feminist Ethics and In Vitro Fertilization ”in Contemporary Issues in Bioethics, ed. Beauchamp,Tom L& Leroy Walters: Wadsworth, a division of Thomson Learning,Inc. 6th edition:pp.580-588
‧Tong, Rosemarie(1990),”The overdue death of a feminist chameleon : Taking a stand on surrogacy arrangements” in The Ethics of Reproductive Technology, ed. Kenneth D. Alpern , New York:Oxford University Press:pp.277-297
III、網站資料
‧台灣大學社會學系/TSD科技民主與社會網站：http://tsd.social.ntu.edu.tw
‧台灣司法院法學資料檢索系統：http://nwjirs.judicial.gov.tw/FJUD/index.htm
‧台灣生殖醫學會網站：http://www.tsrm.org.tw
‧行政院主計處統計專區網站：http://www.dgbas.gov.tw/mp.asp?mp=1
‧行政院衛生署網站：http://www.doh.gov.tw
‧兒童福利聯盟文教基金會網站：http://www.children.org.tw；
兒福聯盟收養出養服務資訊網：http://www.adopt.org.tw/
‧美國 SMI(Surrogate Mothers, Inc.)代孕公司網站：http://www.surrogatemothers.com/
‧英國COTS(Childlessness Overcome Through Surrogate)代孕組織網站：http://www.surrogacy.org.uk
‧Patrick Jennings Law Office網站：http://www.patjennings.net