Australian woman carried her own baby and surrogacy child simultaneously

An unusual situation where a surrogate conceived naturally around the same time as an embryo transfer has proved challenging for a Queensland court.

The surrogate and the intended parents connected via a mutual friend on social media and agreed to an altruistic surrogacy arrangement. The couple's single embryo was transferred in April 2025, and a scan two weeks later revealed the surrogate was pregnant with twins. DNA testing during pregnancy revealed the boy was the biological child of the surrogate and her husband, while the girl was the child of the intended parents. The children were born in November 2025.

'The [male] child was conceived separately to the April 2025 embryo implantation process, and without medical assistance', said Judge Jodie Wooldridge KC, in her judgment relating to granting a parentage order. 'The respondents had not intended to conceive a child at the time, however, that is not to suggest [he] is anything other than loved and wanted.'

There is no disagreement between the families over the children's parentage, and each is being raised by their genetic parents. However, because the children had shared a uterus during the pregnancy, there was a complication in granting a parentage order (equivalent to a UK parental order).

Under section 24 of the Surrogacy Act 2010 (Queensland): 'the court may make a parentage order about the child … only if it also makes a parentage order about each living birth sibling of the child in favour of the [same] applicant, or joint applicants,' where a 'birth sibling' means 'a brother or sister of the child who is born as a result of the same pregnancy as the child.'

Effectively, the act prevents the court from granting a parentage order for one of a pair of twins but not the other, because in most situations separating twins is not seen as being in their interest.

A report from an independent counsellor presented to the court said: 'On the balance of probabilities and assuming that both infants are raised in stable and nurturing family systems, the available research does not support the conclusion that separation of the twins from birth is, in itself, likely to cause psychological harm.'

Judge Wooldridge was satisfied that it was in each child's interest to remain with their current families and ultimately resolved that the babies were 'gestational twins' but not 'birth siblings' for the purposes of the Act. She was then able to grant a parentage order for the intended parents and their daughter.

A similar conception occurred in California in 2017 (see BioNews 925) when a surrogate unknowingly relinquished her own genetic son alongside the intended parents' child, only regaining custody after a dispute with the surrogacy agency.