The Mark Surrogacy Scandal
What began as a dream for several women to help build families has now become one of the most disturbing surrogacy scandals in recent memory. This case has raised urgent questions about oversight, ethics, and accountability in the U.S. fertility industry.
Kayla Elliott’s Story
In January 2024, surrogate Kayla Elliott was contacted through a Facebook group by representatives of Mark Surrogacy. The agency arranged for her to fly to California to meet her intended parents. When she arrived, only the intended father, Guojun Xuan, was present.
Communication with the couple quickly became limited, with most updates coming through agency staff. The staff discouraged her from contacting the intended parents directly. The intended parent profile she was given turned out to be entirely fabricated. The baby Kayla delivered is now in foster care, one of 21 infants later found living in a luxury Arcadia, California home under deeply troubling circumstances.
The Raid
In May 2025, tragedy struck when a two-month-old baby was hospitalized with a traumatic brain injury, allegedly inflicted by a nanny, Chunmei Li. Li is wanted for assault and remains at large. That incident triggered a raid on the $4 million Arcadia home owned by Xuan (age 65) and his partner Silvia Zhang (age 38).
Authorities—joined by the FBI—discovered:
-
21 children in total, 15 inside the home and 6 at other locations
-
Many had no birth certificates or medical records
-
Some had never seen a pediatrician
-
The couple was arrested on suspicion of felony child endangerment
The true motive for housing so many children is still unclear. Investigators have not determined whether these children were being prepared for illegal adoption or sale, to be raised by Xuan and Silvia, or whether they were being kept for other undisclosed reasons.
Alexa Fasold’s Uncertain Future
One of the surrogates still pregnant for the agency, Alexa Fasold, is due to deliver in September 2025. She had been told she would meet her intended parents at the embryo transfer, but they never came. She was told they had health problems and could not attend. Instead, two agency representatives attended, bringing gifts.
Although the agency has since shut down, Alexa recently received an email from its former owners asking for the name of the hospital where she plans to give birth. Her attorney has been unable to reach anyone associated with the company. Alexa now faces the emotional strain of not knowing what will happen to the baby she is carrying. She fears that even offering to care for the child could expose her to legal repercussions.
No Real Intended Parents
Posting online about their journey and later their concerns, several surrogates discovered that they had been shown the same “intended mother” photo during the matching process, despite several having specific matching criteria requests. This all suggests there may have been no real intended parents in some cases.
Echoes of the Theresa Erickson Case
Sadly, the industry has seen something like this before. In 2011, attorney Theresa Erickson pleaded guilty in federal court to running a baby-selling scheme. She arranged for women to travel to Ukraine to be implanted with embryos (with unknown genetic origins), without legal agreements in place. Once pregnant, she marketed the babies to new intended parents and fabricated stories that the “original” parents had backed out. It is believed that Erickson charged $100,00 to $150,000 for each case.
Erickson filed false paperwork with the Courts to make these arrangements appear legitimate. The fallout from her case led to heightened awareness and, in some jurisdictions, new safeguards such as requiring IVF doctors to provide affidavits confirming that they performed the embryo transfer and specifying the date.
Unanswered Questions
The Arcadia case leaves troubling questions:
-
Which attorneys, if any, represented Xuan and Zhang?
-
Did IVF clinics fail to notice patterns, such as repeated transfers, identical intended parent names, or inconsistent documents?
-
How did so many pregnancies proceed without verification of genuine intended parents?
Proposed Safeguards
While no system can entirely prevent rare and extreme abuses, we can strengthen protections:
-
Agencies must collect valid government-issued identification from both surrogates and intended parents, with copies provided to each party’s attorney.
-
Surrogates must meet their intended parents, either virtually or in person, before legal clearance is issued.
-
Legal contracts must require intended parents to disclose any current or planned surrogacy arrangements, both at present and within the next year, ensuring clear grounds for enforcement if this requirement is violated.
-
To prevent IVF clinics from facilitating multiple transfers for the same intended parents without oversight, clinics should require a standardized disclosure form in which intended parents confirm whether they are involved in one, two, or more concurrent surrogacies. The completed form must be shared with both the gestational carrier and the agency before any medication begins.
Accountability
This case has already damaged public trust. Changes are needed.
The entire surrogacy community, from intended parents, agencies, attorneys, advocates, and medical professionals, should be watching this case closely. It’s not only about the 21 children rescued in Arcadia; it’s about closing dangerous loopholes before another family, surrogate, or child is put at risk. True safety in our field comes from holding everyone accountable. This means not just the agency, but every professional (IVF clinics, doctors, nurses, attorneys, etc.) and all other participants involved. This will ensure that violations carry real consequences, including legal and, where warranted, criminal prosecution. The more accountability we demand from everyone in the field, the safer and more ethical surrogacy will be for all.
If you have information related to this case or have been in contact with Silvia Zhang or Guojun Xuan, please contact the FBI.
.
