Surrogacy in South Dakota: The Complete 2026 Guide

⭐ South Dakota prohibits nothing. No surrogacy statute, no void-contract rule, no criminal provision, no compensation bar. Title 25 contains no assisted-reproduction provision at all — searching the title index for "insemination" and "assisted reproduction" returns zero.

And it has more machinery than most silent states. § 25-8-7: paternity actions "are not exclusive of other proceedings that may be available on principles of law or equity." § 25-8-12: a proceeding "may be instituted during the pregnancy of the mother," and — the part worth reading twice — "Except with the consent of the person alleged to be the father, the trial may not be had until after the birth of the child."

That exception means a fully consensual case can, on the face of the statute, be tried before the birth. ⛔ But it reaches the father only.

And there is a maternity provision — just not in Title 25. § 34-25-16.7, in full: "For the purposes of birth registration, the mother is deemed to be the woman who gives birth to the child, unless otherwise determined by a court of law prior to the filing of the birth certificate." § 34-25-8 makes that window seven days after the birth.

Because Chapter 25-8 is paternity from end to end: sixty-four sections, zero hits for "maternity," zero for "surrogate." Nothing in South Dakota law establishes an intended mother or displaces the carrier as the child's mother — and § 25-5-3 presumes a married carrier and her husband are the parents.

Ivy does not arrange journeys in South Dakota.

South Dakota has no surrogacy statute, so the framework is what the general law supplies — and here that is more than in most silent states, but incomplete in one specific way.

No assisted-reproduction law, and no maternity action in Title 25

Title 25 contains no assisted-reproduction provision; a search of the title index for "insemination" and "assisted reproduction" returns zero. Chapter 25-8, "Paternity Proceedings", runs to sixty-four sections and returns 0 hits for "maternity" and 0 for "surrogate."

Nothing in Title 25 provides an action to determine, establish or disestablish a mother-child relationship. The opening is in the vital-records title instead: § 34-25-16.7 makes the birth mother the mother for registration "unless otherwise determined by a court of law prior to the filing of the birth certificate" — a real maternity hook, on a seven-day clock, with no published decision applying it to a carrier.

And the vital-records chapter is silent too: SDCL Title 34, Chapter 25 contains zero references to a surrogate birth.

§ 25-8-7 — the paternity chapter says it does not occupy the field

Verbatim: "An action to determine paternity … are civil actions governed by the Rules of Civil Procedure. They are not exclusive of other proceedings that may be available on principles of law or equity. Upon determining paternity of a child, the court shall give judgment declaring the paternity of the father to the child."

⭐ A legislature expressly pointing at equity is not nothing. But it is an invitation, not a procedure.

§ 25-8-12 — pre-birth trial, by consent

Verbatim: "The proceeding to determine paternity or compel support by a father … may be instituted during the pregnancy of the mother or after the birth of the child. Except with the consent of the person alleged to be the father, the trial may not be had until after the birth of the child." (Last amended SL 2023, ch 84, § 3.)

Read the exception, not just the rule. The default is that trial waits for birth; with the alleged father's consent it need not. In a consensual arrangement that is, on the statute's face, a pre-birth paternity adjudication. ⚠️ We located no published decision applying it in a carrier case, so treat it as a textual reading rather than an established practice.

The marital presumption, which cuts against the plan

§ 25-5-3, in full: "The husband and wife are presumed to be the parents of any child born to the wife during the marriage or within ten months after the dissolution of the marriage."

§ 25-8-57: a child born in wedlock "is presumed legitimate to that marriage," and the presumption "can only be disputed by the husband or wife, or a descendant of one or both of them, or a potential biological father of the child." ⭐ "The potential biological father has standing to file an action to rebut this presumption prior to obtaining genetic test results," though he cannot rebut it without genetic test results meeting § 25-8-58.

Put those together and a genetic intended father has a coherent, narrow path: standing as a potential biological father, filing during pregnancy, and — with consent — trial before the birth.

There is no equivalent for an intended mother. None.

Case law

We located no published South Dakota decision on a gestational carrier arrangement. A sweep of Supreme Court opinions returned 0 for "surrogacy" and 0 for "gestational carrier."

General information, not legal advice.

⛔ Ivy does not arrange journeys in South Dakota — that is about where a journey is placed, not about where you live. An intended parent living in South Dakota can pursue a journey in a state where we do work. ⚠️ The constraint here is local, and the reason is an incomplete route rather than a prohibition.

What South Dakota gives you is real, and better than most silent states. § 25-8-7 says paternity actions "are not exclusive of other proceedings that may be available on principles of law or equity." § 25-8-12 allows a proceeding to be "instituted during the pregnancy of the mother," and permits trial before the birth "with the consent of the person alleged to be the father."

For a genetic intended father, that assembles into a narrow but coherent path. § 25-8-57 gives a "potential biological father" standing to rebut the marital presumption, and says he may file "prior to obtaining genetic test results" — though he cannot rebut without them.

For an intended mother, there is nothing. Chapter 25-8 is paternity from end to end — zero references to maternity — and no South Dakota action establishes an intended mother or displaces the carrier as mother.

And if the carrier is married, the presumption runs against you before you start. § 25-5-3: "The husband and wife are presumed to be the parents of any child born to the wife during the marriage."

We also located no published South Dakota decision on a gestational carrier arrangement, so there is no precedent to price the risk against.

Ask a South Dakota attorney precisely how the intended mother becomes a legal parent, and get that answer in writing before you match. Contact us.

⛔ There is no Ivy price for South Dakota, because Ivy does not place journeys here.

The usual cost drivers are not prohibited. We located no South Dakota statute capping compensation, requiring escrow, licensing agencies or penalizing payment. Nothing here makes an ordinary cost structure unlawful.

What you would be paying for is an argument, not a procedure. South Dakota supplies no surrogacy statute, only an untested maternity hook in § 34-25-16.7, and no published decision on a carrier arrangement, so the legal work is construction rather than compliance.

Part of it is cheaper than you might expect. The father's side has statutory footing: § 25-8-12 permits filing during pregnancy and, by consent, trial before the birth.

⛔ The rest of it is the expensive part. Establishing the intended mother has no statutory basis at all, and § 25-5-3's marital presumption may put the carrier's husband in the way first.

Budget for adoption as a fallback, and ask your attorney to price that path before you commit to anything medical. Budget for the registrar too — Title 34, Chapter 25 contains no surrogate-birth provision and the state publishes no form or fee.

For what a journey costs where Ivy works, see intended parents or contact us.

⛔ There is no Ivy process to describe in South Dakota, because Ivy does not match here. What follows is the order a South Dakota attorney would have to work in, without a surrogacy statute to work from.

1. ⭐ Start with what is not in the way. No South Dakota statute prohibits surrogacy, voids the agreement, caps compensation or penalizes anyone.
2. Establish the carrier's marital status first. § 25-5-3 presumes "the husband and wife" are the parents of a child born to the wife during the marriage, and § 25-8-57 limits who may dispute that presumption.
3. Map the father's route, because it exists. § 25-8-12 permits a proceeding "instituted during the pregnancy," and permits trial before birth "with the consent of the person alleged to be the father." § 25-8-57 gives a potential biological father standing, subject to genetic test results under § 25-8-58.
4. Then ask the question nobody's statute answers: how does the intended mother become a legal parent? Chapter 25-8 has zero maternity provisions, and we located no published South Dakota decision on a carrier arrangement.
5. Ask whether the argument runs through equity. § 25-8-7 says paternity actions "are not exclusive of other proceedings that may be available on principles of law or equity" — an opening, not a procedure.
6. Ask about the birth certificate separately. SDCL Title 34, Chapter 25 contains zero references to a surrogate birth, and the Department of Health's vital-records pages return none either.
7. Ask what the adoption fallback costs and how long it takes, before anything medical begins.

Contact us and we will be straight with you about where we work.

⛔ Ivy does not accept surrogate applications from South Dakota residents. Here is what South Dakota law does and does not say about you.

Nothing makes you a criminal, and no statute prohibits surrogacy, voids a carrier agreement or caps compensation. Title 25 has no assisted-reproduction provision at all.

⛔ But one piece of general law reaches your agreement directly, and it protects you. § 53-9-13 makes void and unenforceable any contract provision that "coerces, compels, or attempts to compel a pregnant woman to undergo an abortion," makes her refusal a breach, or shifts costs to her for refusing — and § 22-17-14 makes requiring such a provision a Class 1 misdemeanor, with a subsequent offense a Class 6 felony. So your agreement is not "the whole of it" after all.

And the same silence means nothing protects you. No escrow requirement, no independent-counsel requirement, no written-agreement rule, no medical-decision provision, no eligibility criteria. Your agreement is the whole of it, and no South Dakota court has ruled on whether such an agreement is enforceable.

The hardest question is how you stop being the child's legal mother. Chapter 25-8 is paternity only — sixty-four sections, zero references to maternity. There is no South Dakota action to displace a birth mother.

And if you are married, your husband is in this whether or not anyone has mentioned him. § 25-5-3: "The husband and wife are presumed to be the parents of any child born to the wife during the marriage or within ten months after the dissolution of the marriage." Under § 25-8-57 that presumption "can only be disputed by the husband or wife … or a potential biological father," and the potential biological father needs genetic test results to rebut it.

One provision does help the intended father move early: § 25-8-12 lets a proceeding be "instituted during the pregnancy," with trial before birth only by his consent.

Take the agreement to a South Dakota attorney before you sign it, and ask about your spouse specifically.

⛔ Ivy does not accept applications from South Dakota residents, so Ivy's criteria do not apply here.

And no South Dakota statute sets any. We located no minimum age, no prior-birth requirement, no BMI limit, no screening protocol, no counseling requirement, no independent-counsel rule and no residency rule for a surrogate. Title 25 contains no assisted-reproduction provision at all.

The requirement that matters most is one you cannot satisfy by qualifying. Chapter 25-8 is paternity only — zero maternity provisions — so the only route to remove you as the child's legal mother is § 34-25-16.7, which has never been applied to a carrier.

And your marital status changes the picture before anything else does. § 25-5-3: "The husband and wife are presumed to be the parents of any child born to the wife during the marriage or within ten months after the dissolution of the marriage." ⭐ Under § 25-8-57, that presumption may be disputed only by "the husband or wife, or a descendant … or a potential biological father," and the potential biological father needs genetic test results.

The one thing with a clear statutory basis is the intended father's filing. § 25-8-12 permits a proceeding "instituted during the pregnancy," and trial before the birth with his consent.

Ask a South Dakota attorney how your name comes off the record — before anything medical begins.

⛔ There is no Ivy compensation package for South Dakota, because Ivy does not match here.

South Dakota does not regulate surrogate compensation at all. We located no cap, no ban, no escrow rule and no published decision on payment to a carrier. Unlike Louisiana or Nebraska, payment is not what creates the problem here.

⛔ The problem is that nothing has been tested. No South Dakota statute says a surrogacy agreement is enforceable, and no South Dakota appellate decision has ever considered one. A payment schedule is only as strong as the agreement carrying it.

Nothing requires your money to be held safely. Several states require compensation to sit with an independent escrow agent before medication begins. We located no such rule in South Dakota. Ivy uses an independently administered escrow account everywhere it works, because it protects the surrogate — not because a statute demands it.

Two more gaps your agreement would have to fill: we located no South Dakota provision requiring intended parents to maintain or pay for your health coverage, and none addressing complications or postpartum care.

Before you rely on any South Dakota payment schedule, have a South Dakota attorney tell you in writing what happens if the other side stops paying. For what compensation looks like where Ivy works, see the compensation page.

⚠️ Ivy does not match in South Dakota, so nothing here is a recommendation for a surrogacy journey. A reader in the state may still be looking for fertility care.

We have not verified a South Dakota fertility practice for this page. Rather than repeat a directory listing, this section says so. When we list a clinic we check its own website, including the state it is in — a check this page has not completed for South Dakota.

Ask any practice directly which parts of an IVF or carrier cycle it performs, where its laboratory is, and whether it accepts carrier cycles at all.

And keep the two questions apart. A clinic's willingness to perform a transfer says nothing about whether an intended mother can be adjudicated a parent afterward — and South Dakota's only maternity hook, § 34-25-16.7, has never been applied to a carrier. A willing clinic is not a parentage plan.

Parentage: SDCL ch. 25-8, Paternity Proceedings — sixty-four sections, ⛔ zero references to maternity or to a surrogate. § 25-8-7: paternity actions "are not exclusive of other proceedings that may be available on principles of law or equity." ⭐ § 25-8-12: a proceeding "may be instituted during the pregnancy," and "Except with the consent of the person alleged to be the father, the trial may not be had until after the birth."

Marital presumption: § 25-5-3 — "The husband and wife are presumed to be the parents of any child born to the wife during the marriage or within ten months after the dissolution." § 25-8-57 — disputable only by the husband or wife, a descendant, or a potential biological father, who needs genetic test results.

Vital records: SDCL Title 34, ch. 25 — zero references to a surrogate birth. The Department of Health's vital-records pages return none either, and publish no surrogate-birth form or fee.

Case law: We located no published South Dakota decision on a gestational carrier arrangement.

For Chinese intended parents: South Dakota is in the Chinese Consulate-General in Chicago's district.

Ivy: Ivy does not arrange journeys in South Dakota. Contact us. Nearby: Minnesota · Iowa · Colorado.