Fashion mogul Adam Frisby speaks out after ‘deflating’ surrogacy debate in Parliament (EXCLUSIVE)

Adam Frisby wanted Parliament to listen. More than 113,000 people signed his petition asking for intended parents to be recognised as their child’s legal parents from birth, and on 7 September, MPs finally debated it.

Instead of feeling victorious, Frisby and his fiancé Jamie Corbett left Westminster feeling “completely deflated”.

For the fashion mogul, whose daughter Leven was born through surrogacy, the debate was about far more than paperwork. It was about whether families like his are properly understood – and, at times, whether they are even considered a “traditional” family at all.

With his campaign paused “for now”, Frisby speaks to Attitude about what happened in Parliament, the comments he found hardest to hear, the reality of surrogacy for two dads, and what it would take to bring the fight for reform back to life.

You’ve said you’re ending the campaign “for now”. What would need to happen for you to pick it back up?

I think I need to see that there is actually an appetite from Government to properly look at reform. We got over 100,000 signatures in 70 hours , had lots of media coverage and we got it debated in Parliament and I genuinely felt like we had done everything we could possibly do. 

I never expected the law to change overnight but I did hope we might leave Parliament with atleast a review date. A timeline of some sort. Even just a feeling that there was some urgency around it. Instead we were essentially told it would be considered at some point in the future which is what families have been hearing for years.

So for now I just feel abit defeated with it and not entirely sure where we’d go next. If the Government announced a proper review or there was a genuine opportunity to move reform forward then of course I would want to be part of that conversation. This means far too much to me not to be.

When you walked out of Parliament after the debate, what was the overriding emotion for you?

Deflated. Completely deflated.

I went into it feeling genuinely hopeful. Not naive enough to think we were walking out with a new law but hopeful that after everything we had done and all the families who had shared their stories there would be some movement.

Instead I walked out feeling like the actual issue we were there to discuss had almost been lost. There was so much conversation about whether surrogacy itself was right or wrong and some of the language used was really difficult to listen to.

Jamie and I got back to the hotel and cried. I think everything just hit us. We had put so much of our family and our life out there because we genuinely thought we could make a difference.

You’ve said you were genuinely shocked to hear an MP talk about “traditional, stable family structures” involving biological mothers. What did that tell you about how some politicians still view families like yours?

It was probably one of the moments that shocked me most because suddenly it felt much bigger than surrogacy.

Jamie and I are two dads raising our daughter. She is surrounded by love and stability every single day. So when you hear language about “traditional, stable family structures” in this context it is difficult not to question where families like ours fit into that person’s idea of what a family should look like.

Families come in so many forms now. Two mums. Two dads. Single parents. Adoptive parents. Step parents. Grandparents raising children. Biology alone does not determine whether a child grows up in a loving and stable home.

I genuinely thought we were further along than having to explain that in 2026.

Did you ever feel during the debate that people were talking about your family without actually understanding what you had experienced?

Absolutely. That was probably one of the hardest things about sitting there. I heard surrogacy discussed in ways that felt completely unrecognisable from our experience.

People can absolutely have concerns about surrogacy and there should be scrutiny because women and children must be protected. I have never argued otherwise.

But Krista isn’t some anonymous woman who disappeared from our lives the second Leven was born. She’s family. Her daughter is family. She came to stay with us in the UK. Leven will grow up knowing exactly who she is and the incredible thing she did for us.

When you have lived that relationship and then hear it reduced to something cold or transactional it is really difficult.

You’ve been very clear that this campaign was never about taking rights away from surrogates. Do you feel that message was understood by MPs?

By a couple of MPs yes. By most of them, I don’t think it was.

I have said from day one that I would never support legislation that removed protections from surrogates. Krista’s wellbeing mattered to us throughout the entire process and it still matters now.

The frustrating thing is that reform doesn’t have to mean choosing between protecting surrogates and recognising intended parents. We can do both.

The Law Commission spent years looking at this and its proposed pathway actually includes more safeguards before conception such as independent legal advice and counselling while still allowing intended parents to become legal parents from birth…. That is the kind of sensible conversation I wanted us to have.

What do you think opponents fundamentally misunderstand about the relationship between a surrogate and intended parents?

That there is one single version of surrogacy.

There isn’t.

I can only ever speak about our experience and the relationship we have with Krista but it wasn’t somebody handing us a baby and walking away. We went through pregnancy together. We spoke constantly. We shared appointments and milestones and fears and excitement. Then I was there when Leven was born.

And that relationship didn’t end at birth. Krista will always be part of Leven’s story and part of our lives.

Of course not every surrogacy journey will look like ours which is exactly why you need proper regulation and safeguards. But I think sometimes the debate starts from the assumption that the relationship must inherently be exploitative and that simply isn’t what surrogacy is.

One of the biggest arguments against your proposal was that a surrogate needs the opportunity to change her mind after giving birth. How do you respond to that?

I understand why people raise it and I absolutely believe a surrogate needs proper protection.

My argument has never been that a woman should have no rights after giving birth. It is that the current system isn’t the only possible way of protecting her.

There are ways of creating a system where intended parents can be recognised from birth while still giving the surrogate meaningful protections and a route to withdraw consent. In fact that is broadly what the Law Commission proposed after years of consultation. 

For me the answer is better legislation and stronger safeguards before anyone even enters a surrogacy arrangement. Not leaving everybody in legal limbo after a baby has already arrived.

If you could rewrite the legislation yourself tomorrow, what would the ideal system look like particularly when it comes to protecting the surrogate?

I would want intended parents recognised as legal parents from birth where the arrangement has gone through a proper regulated pathway.

Before pregnancy there should be independent legal advice for everybody. Counselling. Medical screening. Proper safeguarding. Clear rules around expenses and payments. Everyone should understand exactly what they are entering into and nobody should ever feel pressured or financially exploited.

There also needs to be a clear mechanism protecting a surrogate if she changes her mind.

A lot of that work has effectively already been done by the Law Commission. They spent years consulting on this and even produced draft legislation. 

I don’t think we need to choose between protecting surrogates and protecting intended parents and children. Good legislation should protect everyone.

Do you think the debate became too focused on whether surrogacy itself is morally acceptable rather than on the specific issue you were asking Parliament to address?

Yes and that was probably my biggest frustration.

The petition wasn’t asking Parliament whether surrogacy should exist. Surrogacy already exists legally in the UK. The question was about what happens when a child is born and who the law recognises as that child’s parents. 

At points I felt like we were having a completely different debate.

There are absolutely wider ethical conversations to have about surrogacy but families are going through this process right now. Babies are being born right now. Those families still have to navigate a legal framework that even the Law Commission has said has significant problems. 

You’ve faced accusations around “baby buying”. How difficult has it been to hear people reduce what was such a long, emotional process to that phrase?

It’s actually disgusting.

People can disagree with surrogacy. That’s their right. But phrases like “baby buying” reduce our family into something horrible and untrue.

Leven was wanted and loved long before she existed. We went through years of planning to become her dads and she is biologically one of ours… Nobody bought our daughter.

And the hardest part is knowing that one day Leven could potentially read those words about her family. She isn’t a political argument. She’s our little girl.

I can deal with people attacking me. I’m an adult and I can deal with it, but it becomes very different when that language involves your child.

You’ve said you and Jamie cried after returning to the hotel following the debate. What did you say to each other that night?

It was basically “what more could we have done?”

We had shared the most personal parts of our journey. Over 100,000 people had signed the petition. Families had messaged us with their experiences. We had got the issue into Parliament. 

I think we both just felt exhausted.

But we also reminded each other why we had done it. We did it for Leven. Even if nothing changes tomorrow she will one day know that her dads tried.

And I will always be proud of that.

Would you describe what happened in Parliament as a setback specifically for LGBTQ+ families or as a wider failure in how the UK approaches surrogacy?

I think it affects everyone who creates a family through surrogacy BUT I think it felt like a setback for LGBTQ+ families as you could see and hear the sentiment of the MP’s who attended. I think some of the language used around what constitutes a family understandably hits LGBTQ+ parents particularly hard.

For me this has always been bigger than Jamie and me. It’s about every family going through surrogacy who deserves a legal system that reflects the reality of their family.

Do you think gay men face a particular kind of scrutiny when they become parents through surrogacy?

Yes, 100% 

I think there is sometimes an additional conversation / judgement around two men becoming parents that heterosexual couples using surrogacy don’t necessarily encounter in the same way.

People question where the mother is. They question whether a child needs a mum. They question biology. Then when money is involved in international surrogacy you can also get this horrible narrative around wealthy gay men buying children.

I can only speak from what we have experienced but there have definitely been moments where it has felt like the conversation wasn’t actually about surrogacy anymore. It was about whether people were comfortable with two men being dads.

What would you say to another gay couple who is considering surrogacy in the UK and is now looking at what happened to you?

I would never want what happened in Parliament to put somebody off creating their family.

Our journey gave us Leven and there isn’t a day that goes by where Jamie and I aren’t completely overwhelmed by how lucky we are to be her dads.

The law desperately needs modernising in my view but I wouldn’t change our journey for the world. And I certainly wouldn’t let the opinions of people who don’t understand your family stop anyone from creating one and fulfilling their dreams of having a family.