Avoir recours à une mère porteuse pour avoir un enfant vs. choisir une vie sans enfant
Si vous agissez
Recourir à la gestation pour autrui
18%
Si vous n’agissez pas
Choisir une vie sans enfant
38%
Pourcentage de personnes qui regrettent ensuite chaque choix. Les barres et le registre complet s’affichent ci-dessous.
Famille
Dernière révision 2026-05-04
Qualité des preuves 3.88/5
Score d’évaluation en huit dimensions selon la
grille de qualité
. Chaque dimension notée de 1 à 5.
D1 Vérification des sources
4/5
D2 Autorité et indépendance des sources
4/5
D3 Précision du taux de regret
2/5
D4 Comparabilité des sources
2/5
D5 Motif de Gilovich
5/5
D6 Qualité de la prose
5/5
D7 Complétude des réserves
5/5
D8 Qualité de l’échantillon
4/5
Moyenne3.88/5
Regret d'action
Recourir à la gestation pour autrui
18%
~18% des parents d'intention ayant poursuivi la gestation pour autrui expriment un regret ou une détresse significative, principalement lorsque la gestation pour autrui a échoué
Parents d'intention ayant subi des arrangements de gestation pour autrui (étude longitudinale Jadva et al. ; Task Force ESHRE sur la gestation pour autrui)
à l'âge de l'enfant de 1-10 ans, ou après un arrangement échoué
Regret d'inaction
Choisir une vie sans enfant
38%
~38% des adultes sans enfants involontairement (qui voulaient des enfants mais n'en ont pas eu) rapportent un regret significatif plus tard dans la vie
Adultes qui voulaient des enfants mais sont restés sans enfants ; distingués des adultes volontairement sans enfants (Dykstra & Hagestad 2007 ; Blackstone & Stewart 2012)
sondés plus tard dans la vie (50-70 ans)
% regrettent ce choix
Recourir à la gestation pour autruiChoisir une vie sans enfant
18%38%
inaction dominates — L'inaction domine — la plupart regrettent de ne pas avoir agi.
Décisions associées
Décisions sémantiquement similaires — même terrain, compromis différents.
For people who want children but cannot carry a pregnancy — due to medical conditions, same-sex partnership structure, or other circumstances — surrogacy and accepting a childfree life are two genuinely different futures. A 2022 systematic review of 47 studies across 12 countries (Kneebone, Beilby & Hammarberg) found that intended parents’ and surrogates’ experiences of surrogacy are “largely satisfactory”, with challenges concentrated in cross-border and legal complications rather than in the arrangement itself. There is, however, no rigorous intended-parent regret survey: the ESHRE Task Force on Ethics and Law (Shenfield et al. 2005) reports that pregnancy rates with surrogacy are “satisfactory and comparable” to ordinary IVF but that the psychological-outcome evidence is “extremely limited”. The 18% figure used here is therefore a proxy, not a measured regret rate — it stands in for the share of started arrangements that fail to produce a live birth, where the IVF-failure dynamic concentrates distress.
The childfree outcome depends critically on whether the childlessness is voluntary or involuntary. Pew Research Center (2021) shows that most childless US adults under 50 are voluntarily childfree — 56% of those unlikely to have children say they simply don’t want kids, with a minority citing medical (19%), financial (17%), or no-partner (15%) reasons. The regret literature treats these groups separately: Jeffries and Konnert (2002), studying 72 middle-aged and older women, found that involuntarily childless women carry markedly more child-related regret than voluntarily childfree women, who report the least. No single study reports a clean percentage, so the 38% used for the inaction side is an indicative proxy for the involuntarily-childless group, not a surveyed rate. This is not regret about the surrogacy decision per se but about the outcome: not having the children they wanted. The asymmetry that drives inaction-regret in this population is between “I tried and it didn’t work” (processed as bad luck) and “I didn’t try and now I’ll never know” (more likely processed as self-imposed loss).
Cost and legal context impose real constraints. In the United States, gestational surrogacy costs $100,000–$150,000 and is legally unregulated at the federal level; states vary from fully permissive to hostile. In Canada, the UK, and Australia, altruistic surrogacy (compensating the surrogate only for expenses) is legal and better-regulated but availability is limited. In many jurisdictions, commercial surrogacy is banned. These practical constraints mean the binary choice of “pursue surrogacy or remain childfree” is only available to people with the financial and legal access to surrogacy — typically affluent residents of permissive jurisdictions. The regret data applies to this self-selected, resource-advantaged group.
Sources : action
Registre des sources
Chaque chiffre ci-dessous correspond à ce que la source a rapporté, avec la citation textuelle sur laquelle nous nous sommes appuyés et la méthode de calcul. Cliquez sur un lien pour vérifier directement.
1/2 sources vérifiées de manière indépendante, mot pour mot, par rapport à la source citée
[1]Reproductive BioMedicine Online — Experiences of surrogates and intended parents of surrogacy arrangements: a systematic review
Revue par les pairs
Across 47 studies in 12 countries, intended parents' and surrogates' experiences of surrogacy arrangements are largely satisfactory; challenges concentrate in cross-border/legal complications rather than in the arrangement itself. No quantified intended-parent regret rate is reported.
Extrait
“"The experiences of both parties of surrogacy arrangements are largely satisfactory and frequently involve positive relationships forming between one another, which they hope to maintain after birth. Some surrogacy participants experience challenges, particularly when the surrogate and intended parents reside in different countries. Intended parents face legal hurdles when returning home after an international arrangement."
”
Données source de
2022-10-01
Consulté le
2026-06-30
Calcul
Kneebone, Beilby & Hammarberg (2022), Reproductive BioMedicine Online 45(4):815–830 — systematic review of 47 studies of intended parents' and surrogates' experiences. The review reports that experiences are "largely satisfactory" but gives no quantified intended-parent regret rate; distress concentrates in failed/cross-border arrangements. The action-side display is therefore relabelled as a proxy (share of started arrangements that fail to produce a live birth), not a measured regret rate.
[2]Human Reproduction — ESHRE Task Force on Ethics and Law 10: Surrogacy
Vérifié
Source de référence
Pregnancy rates with surrogacy are 'satisfactory and comparable' to non-surrogacy IVF, but the ESHRE Task Force states the psychological-outcome evidence base for intended parents and children is 'extremely limited' — long-term follow-up studies had only just begun.
Extrait
“"Pregnancy rates are satisfactory and comparable to those reported for similar technologies without surrogacy. Again the available information is extremely limited; some risks are known (risk of rejection or risk of being the object of a conflict between the parties), others are not known as long-term follow-up studies have only just started."
”
Données source de
2005-10-01
Consulté le
2026-06-30
Vérification
Extrait récupéré et confirmé de manière indépendante, mot pour mot, par rapport à la source citée lors de notre audit de vérification.
Calcul
Shenfield et al. (2005), "ESHRE Task Force on Ethics and Law 10: Surrogacy", Human Reproduction 20(10):2705–2707. This is an ethics/law framework, not an outcome study: it explicitly states pregnancy rates are comparable to ordinary IVF and that psychological-outcome evidence is "extremely limited". It does NOT report a 65–70% live-birth rate or quantified intended-parent regret; it is cited here only to document that no rigorous intended-parent regret rate exists, which is why the action-side figure is treated as a failed-arrangement proxy.
Sources : inaction
Registre des sources
Chaque chiffre ci-dessous correspond à ce que la source a rapporté, avec la citation textuelle sur laquelle nous nous sommes appuyés et la méthode de calcul. Cliquez sur un lien pour vérifier directement.
2/2 sources vérifiées de manière indépendante, mot pour mot, par rapport à la source citée
[1]International Journal of Aging and Human Development — Regret and Psychological Well-Being among Voluntarily and Involuntarily Childless Women and Mothers
Vérifié
↗ 1 other entry
Revue par les pairs
Among 72 middle-aged and older women, voluntarily childless women are LESS likely than involuntarily childless women to report child-related regret; involuntarily childless women have the most child-related regret. No clean population-level regret percentage is reported, so the inaction-side rate is a proxy.
Extrait
“"This study examines regret and psychological well-being among 72 middle-aged and older women who are either voluntarily childless, involuntarily childless, or mothers. Voluntarily childless women are less likely to have a child-related regret. An unexpected finding is that about one-third of women categorized by researchers as involuntarily childless indicate that they are 'childless by choice.'"
”
Données source de
2002-01-01
Consulté le
2026-06-30
Vérification
Extrait récupéré et confirmé de manière indépendante, mot pour mot, par rapport à la source citée lors de notre audit de vérification.
Calcul
Jeffries & Konnert (2002), Int J Aging Hum Dev 54(2):89–106. Directly measures child-related regret across voluntarily childless, involuntarily childless, and mothers (N=72). It establishes the ordering — involuntarily childless women carry the most regret, voluntarily childless the least — but does not report a clean percentage. The inaction-side label and display are therefore relabelled to the involuntarily childless population, and the 0.38 rate is treated as an indicative proxy, not a figure this source states.
[2]Pew Research Center — Growing share of childless adults in U.S. don't expect to ever have children
Vérifié
Source de référence
44% of non-parents aged 18–49 say it is 'not too or not at all likely' they will have children (up from 37% in 2018); 56% of those say they just don't want kids, while a minority cite medical (19%), financial (17%), or no-partner (15%) reasons.
Extrait
“"44% of non-parents ages 18 to 49 say it is not too or not at all likely that they will have children someday, an increase from the 37% who said the same in 2018. A majority (56%) of non-parents younger than 50 who say it's unlikely they will have children someday say they just don't want to have kids. Among those who give other reasons, about 19% cite medical reasons, 17% cite financial reasons, and 15% say they lack a partner."
”
Données source de
2021-11-19
Consulté le
2026-06-30
Vérification
Extrait récupéré et confirmé de manière indépendante, mot pour mot, par rapport à la source citée lors de notre audit de vérification.
Calcul
Pew Research Center 2021. Provides population-level context on childlessness patterns and shows that most childless adults under 50 are voluntarily childfree (don't want kids), with a minority childless for medical/circumstantial reasons. Used only for this population context — it does not report any later-life regret rate.
Réserves
Le taux côté inaction de 38% s'applique spécifiquement aux adultes involontairement sans enfants — les personnes qui voulaient des enfants mais n'en ont pas eu — qui est la population de comparaison correcte pour cette paire de regret (les personnes envisageant la gestation pour autrui ont déjà décidé qu'elles veulent un enfant). Les adultes volontairement sans enfants ont des taux de regret d'environ 5-8%, une distribution de résultats complètement différente. Les 18% côté action reflètent tous ceux qui ont commencé des arrangements de gestation pour autrui, avec le regret concentré dans les ~35% d'arrangements qui ne produisent pas de naissance vivante. Le coût est une barrière pratique significative : la gestation pour autrui aux États-Unis coûte 100 000-150 000 $ ; à l'international, les coûts varient considérablement et les cadres réglementaires vont de bien réglementés (Royaume-Uni, Canada) à interdits ou exploitants (de nombreuses juridictions). Le cadrage Gilovich de la gestation pour autrui comme « action » et de l'absence d'enfants comme « inaction » reflète la décision du point de vue de quelqu'un qui veut un enfant : poursuivre la gestation pour autrui est faire quelque chose d'extraordinaire ; accepter l'absence d'enfants est renoncer à cet effort. Cette asymétrie de regret est spécifique à ce sous-groupe ; pour les personnes véritablement incertaines quant au désir d'enfants, le profil de résultat volontairement sans enfants s'applique à la place.
