Surrogacy, as a modern assisted reproductive technology, has raised significant questions regarding the legal status of—and legal protections afforded to—children born through this practice across various legal systems. This research aims to examine and compare the legal protection mechanisms for children born via surrogacy within the legal systems of Iran and England, while evaluating the effectiveness of each in safeguarding the child's best interests. The central research question asks how each of these legal systems determines and protects the status of parentage, identity, and fundamental rights of children born through surrogacy, and what differences exist between them. Employing a descriptive-analytical methodology, this study draws upon legal documents, jurisprudential and legal sources, and a comparative analysis of the regulations in both countries. The findings indicate that in Iranian law—due to the absence of comprehensive legislation on surrogacy—the protection of the child relies primarily on the interpretation of jurisprudential rules, the Civil Code, and judicial precedents, an approach that may be subject to ambiguity. In contrast, the English legal system provides greater clarity regarding the child's status through mechanisms such as the issuance of "parental orders" and the explicit designation of legal parents. Consequently, it appears that the enactment of comprehensive and explicit regulations within Iranian law could prove effective in better ensuring the interests and rights of children born through surrogacy.