DALLAS: A high-profile legal dispute over surrogacy, abortion and parental rights has intensified in Texas, where a California couple and their surrogate are fighting over the future of a newborn diagnosed with a life-threatening heart condition.
The couple, Nausheen Gilkar and Omar Ahmed, told a Dallas court that their newborn son is their child and that his medical condition has deteriorated significantly.
Gilkar became emotional while testifying, saying the baby is the “love of our lives” and expressing anguish over efforts to challenge their parental rights.
The couple says they named the baby Rumi, while the surrogate, McKenna West, has referred to him as Gabriel.
Newborn Has Serious Heart Condition
The baby was diagnosed with hypoplastic left heart syndrome, a congenital condition in which the left side of the heart is severely underdeveloped and cannot adequately support normal blood circulation.
The condition can be fatal without medical treatment and typically requires major medical interventions.
According to court documents filed by the couple’s attorney, the baby’s condition has worsened following a procedure after his birth.
Gilkar told the court that the baby experienced difficulty breathing, choked on medical tubes and required a blood transfusion.
She said the newborn currently remains in critical condition.
Surrogate Seeks Legal Control
West, a nurse who traveled from Alaska to Texas to give birth, is seeking sole conservatorship of the baby.
Her attorneys argue that she should have authority over the child’s medical decisions, particularly because the couple had previously asked her to terminate the pregnancy after learning about the baby’s heart defect.
West testified that she had scheduled an abortion when she was 23 weeks pregnant but ultimately decided she could not go through with it.
She told the court that she believed the baby had a strong chance of surviving and living a long life despite the diagnosis.
West’s attorney also argued that the couple had not demonstrated a firm commitment to providing the child with potentially life-saving surgeries.
During questioning, West said she would abandon her custody claims if the court determined that the couple were committed to ensuring the baby received the necessary surgeries.
Couple Defends Their Parental Rights
Gilkar and Ahmed strongly dispute the surrogate’s claims.
They say they entered into a surrogacy agreement in August 2025 after Gilkar went through eight rounds of in-vitro fertilization in Los Angeles.
Gilkar testified that the process left her unable to continue carrying a pregnancy and that she ultimately underwent a hysterectomy.
She described the surrogacy arrangement as her only remaining option to have a child.
Gilkar also recalled developing a close relationship with West during the process, saying West stayed at their Los Angeles home and that she was with her during the embryo transfer.
Dispute Over Abortion Request
The question of the proposed abortion has become central to the legal battle.
West’s attorneys repeatedly questioned Gilkar about her decision to request termination of the pregnancy after the baby’s diagnosis.
When asked whether she regretted asking West to terminate the pregnancy, Gilkar said she did not.
West’s attorney challenged her over whether someone who had wanted the pregnancy terminated should be trusted to make decisions for the child.
Gilkar maintained that the couple remains committed to their baby and his medical treatment.
Conflicting Legal Claims
The couple argues that West breached the surrogacy agreement by refusing to terminate the pregnancy.
Their attorney also pointed to previous California court proceedings that determined West did not have legal or physical custody rights over the child.
West has asked the Texas court to disregard that ruling and has maintained that she became determined to fight for the baby after learning about his medical condition.
Following the baby’s birth on August 12, the couple obtained a restraining order preventing West from seeing or holding the child.
The judge did not issue a final ruling on custody or conservatorship during Tuesday’s hearing, and the restraining order remained in place.
Surrogacy Laws Add Complexity
The case also highlights the complicated legal landscape surrounding surrogacy in the United States.
Surrogacy is not regulated by a single federal law. Instead, states have different rules governing parental rights, contracts and the legal status of surrogate mothers.
That variation can create disputes when the parties involved have connections to different states.
In this case, the couple is from California, while the surrogate gave birth in Texas, where abortion laws are among the most restrictive in the United States.
The legal dispute now leaves the court to determine questions involving parental rights, medical decision-making and the enforcement of the original surrogacy agreement.
For the couple and the surrogate, the legal battle is unfolding alongside the newborn’s ongoing medical treatment, making the custody dispute especially urgent.
