Surrogate refuses abortion, custody battle reaches Supreme Court

A gestational surrogate who refused to terminate a pregnancy after the baby was diagnosed with a severe heart defect is now fighting the biological parents for custody in a case that has reached the nation's highest court.

Sep 19, 2026

17 cards · 4m · tap to begin

From · · 4m

Surrogate refuses abortion, custody battle reaches Supreme Court

A gestational surrogate who refused to terminate a pregnancy after the baby was diagnosed with a severe heart defect is now fighting the biological parents for custody in a case that has reached the nation's highest court.

In brief

A gestational surrogate who refused to terminate a pregnancy after the baby was diagnosed with a severe heart defect is now fighting the biological parents for custody in a case that has reached the nation's highest court. When a surrogate refuses a parents' request to abort a fetus with a life-threatening condition…

Quick answers

What is HLHS?
Hypoplastic left heart syndrome leaves the left side of the heart severely underdeveloped, preventing normal blood flow. The condition is potentially fatal and usually requires a series of major operations beginning shortly after birth.
What is the key takeaway from Surrogate refuses abortion, custody battle reaches Supreme Court?
When a surrogate refuses a parents' request to abort a fetus with a life-threatening condition, the resulting custody battle can escalate to the Supreme Court, with both sides accusing each other of endangering the child's medical care.

Surrogate refuses to end pregnancy

McKenna West, a gestational surrogate, refused to terminate her pregnancy after the baby was diagnosed in the womb with hypoplastic left heart syndrome, a severe congenital heart condition. The biological parents, Omar Ahmed and Nausheen Gilkar, had initially requested an abortion.

What is HLHS?

Hypoplastic left heart syndrome leaves the left side of the heart severely underdeveloped, preventing normal blood flow. The condition is potentially fatal and usually requires a series of major operations beginning shortly after birth.

Baby born in August

The baby, called Rumi by his parents and Gabriel by the surrogate, was born on August 12. He required intensive medical care from birth and has already undergone major heart surgery.

Surrogate seeks custody

McKenna West is now seeking custody or conservatorship of the five-week-old, arguing she fears the couple could withhold lifesaving treatment. She has taken the case all the way to the US Supreme Court.

Parents deny withholding care

Ahmed and Gilkar have vehemently rejected allegations they would deny their son lifesaving care. At an emotional court hearing, Gilkar broke down describing her fight to become a mother after eight unsuccessful rounds of IVF and a hysterectomy.

“He's our child. We've never wanted anything more than this baby.”

Surrogate's reasoning

West told a Texas court she scheduled an abortion appointment but ultimately decided she could not go through with it. She believed the baby had a great chance at survival and a great chance at leading a long life despite the diagnosis.

“I knew that this baby, despite the diagnosis, had a great chance at survival and a great chance at leading a long life.”

Parents accuse surrogate of fabrication

In a new Supreme Court filing, Ahmed and Gilkar's attorneys accused West of fabricating an emergency and conducting a publicity tour. They argue that granting her requested emergency stay would endanger rather than safeguard the baby.

“McKenna West fabricated an emergency.”

Medical decision-making uncertainty

The parents' lawyers argue that a stay would create confusion over who has authority to approve the baby's medical treatment. This uncertainty could jeopardize doctors' ability to rely on parental consent for necessary procedures.

“A stay would only create confusion over medical decision-making authority and jeopardize the providers' ability to rely on the parents' consent to Rumi's treatment.”

Parents following medical advice

Ahmed and Gilkar say they have followed the recommendations of their son's medical team and have been a constant presence at the hospital. They have never wavered in their commitment to securing lifesaving medical treatment.

Surrogacy agreement details

West entered a gestational surrogacy agreement with Ahmed and Gilkar before the pregnancy. Everything changed when the baby was diagnosed with HLHS in April, prompting the parents' initial request to terminate.

Relationship collapses

After West refused to abort, the relationship between the surrogate and the couple collapsed. West traveled from Alaska to Texas in July and gave birth there on August 12, with the parents rushing from California to be present.

Multi-state legal battle

The custody dispute has stretched across California, Alaska, and Texas. A California court recognized Ahmed and Gilkar as the legal parents, but West has challenged this ruling at the Supreme Court.

Texas court clears relocation

The Texas Supreme Court cleared the way for the couple to take their son from Texas to Los Angeles, where they live. The court concluded that evidence did not cast doubt on their commitment to obtaining appropriate medical treatment.

Surrogate backed by conservative group

West's legal campaign has received backing from Alliance Defending Freedom, a conservative Christian legal advocacy organization involved in major battles over abortion, religious freedom, and LGBTQ plus rights.

Separate Alaska lawsuit

Ahmed and Gilkar are pursuing a separate lawsuit against West in Alaska alleging breach of contract and emotional distress. Those allegations remain unresolved.

GoFundMe for medical costs

Rumi's parents have launched a GoFundMe to help pay for surgeries, medication, therapy, hospital stays, travel, and other costs associated with his treatment. The baby faces significant ongoing medical expenses.

Supreme Court stakes

The case raises fundamental questions about surrogate rights, parental authority, and medical decision-making for critically ill infants. The Supreme Court's decision could set precedent for future surrogacy disputes.

The takeaway

When a surrogate refuses a parents' request to abort a fetus with a life-threatening condition, the resulting custody battle can escalate to the Supreme Court, with both sides accusing each other of endangering the child's medical care.

Read the original on Dailymail

React

Sign in to react and comment.

Comments (0)

Life is short. Keep it sweet. Respect others' opinions and be kind!

    Recommended next

    More decks on breaking and related topics.