This study is based on how politicians’ standars were represented in the debate about assisted reproduction of single women and surrogacy in Sweden. And also which arguments the politicians performed on both issues. The study was based on the protocol 2011/12:91 from the parliamentary debate in Sweden. The aim of the study was to examine political standards is identified according to parenting and family in the assisted reproduction and surrogacy debate. The empirical material has been analyzed through social constructivism as a theory and standard critical perspective related to normality. Argument analysis was used as a method to identify pro et contra arguments on the issues. Two theses from the protocol 2011/12:91 was identified and analyzed. The first thesis was "Every child has a right to have both a mother and a father" and the second thesis was, "Every human should have an opportunity to have children". Pro arguments to the first thesis was that a child has a right to know its genetic origin and to be nursed by both its parents as far as possible. They meant that the traditional family constellation with a mother and a father is a good family to raise a child within. Contra arguments in this issue also meant that the child has a right to know its genetic origin, and therefore should get this right in Sweden to reduce the risk that mothers get infertility treatment abroad with a donor that is anonymous. Additional contra arguments in this thesis was that the most important thing for a child is to grow up in a family with love and care, regardless of family constellation. Pro arguments to the last thesis, "Every human should have an opportunity to have children" was that it is a biological instinct to reproduce and politicians should therefore not stand in the way by prohibiting single women to get assisted reproduction. Contra argument to this thesis was that parenting is an impossible question to fairness. They meant that if you do not have the physical ability to have children, society should not help you with this matter. They also meant that if we legislate surrogacy in Sweden it is a big risk that women become a commodity in the matter. And this risk outweigh parents’ desire to have children.