Surrogacy Dispute in Texas Courts: California Couple vs. Surrogate

A surrogacy dispute involving a California couple and their surrogate over a newborn with a critical heart condition is unfolding in a Texas court. The couple, Nausheen Gilkar and her husband, Omar Ahmed, express their anguish over the surrogate’s attempts to take away their parental rights.

During the court hearing, Gilkar emotionally stated, “He’s our child,” while casting suspicion on the surrogate, McKenna West, claiming she is “unstable” and trying to take the child from them.

This high-profile case has attracted attention from right-to-life groups and Republican leaders. West, a nurse from Alaska, traveled to Texas, where most abortions are banned, to give birth on August 12, which has intensified the legal and ethical debates surrounding surrogacy and abortion.

Legal Battle and Child’s Condition

Gilkar and Ahmed named the newborn Rumi. However, West, who refers to the baby as Gabriel, seeks sole conservatorship to make medical decisions for the infant. The court has yet to rule on final custody, leaving the restraining order preventing West from contact with the child in place.

According to court documents, Rumi is in critical condition, facing complications after a medical procedure post-birth. He has hypoplastic left heart syndrome, a rare defect affecting less than 1,000 newborns annually as per the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Without medical intervention, the condition can be fatal within weeks.

Gilkar described the baby’s struggles following surgery, stating, “He has no blood flow to the left side of his heart,” accompanied by other distressing symptoms. She expressed deep emotional connection and concern, saying, “He’s the most beautiful person I’ve never seen. He’s the love of our lives. He’s suffering a lot.”

Surrogate Accusations and Legal Arguments

West’s legal team argues that Gilkar and Ahmed were hesitant to ensure the baby would receive necessary medical procedures. They highlight the couple’s initial decision to consider abortion due to the diagnosis. West stated she would drop her custody claims if the couple commits to the required surgeries.

West’s attorney, Jeff Domen, focused on the couple’s abortion request, with Gilkar responding she did not regret the decision despite being asked if she would trust someone who wanted her child dead. Gilkar struggled to respond.

Surrogacy Contract Dispute

Gilkar and Ahmed allege West breached their surrogacy contract established in August 2025. Gilkar underwent eight rounds of in vitro fertilization, leading to a hysterectomy, which led to the surrogacy arrangement. She recounted their close involvement, “I was holding her hand” during the IVF transfer process.

California court records indicate West has no legal or physical custody rights. Yet, West requests the Texas judge to discard this ruling, arguing her right to fight for the child post-diagnosis. The absence of federal surrogacy regulation and variability in state laws complicates interpretations in such cases.

West’s attorney, Domen, claims, “We believe Ms. West is the mother of this child,” further complicating the case.