A contract was signed, but one side walked away. McKenna West agreed to carry a baby for Omar Ahmed and Nausheen Gilkar in August 2025. The deal included a clause for termination if a fetal abnormality appeared. When the baby was diagnosed with a heart defect, the parents asked for an abortion. West refused the request and fled to Texas to keep the baby.
Now the Supreme Court has stepped back. Justice Elena Kagan declined to hear the emergency request on Tuesday. The court left the lower court ruling in place. That ruling gave full custody to the biological parents.
West argued she should stay involved in medical decisions. She claimed the parents might stop treatment for the child.
The parents say they are committed to the child’s care. Their attorney, Adam Wolf, told reporters they are “truly grateful that Rumi can continue receiving the treatment he needs to survive.” The baby, named Rumi by the parents and Gabriel by West, was born in Dallas on August 12. He has hypoplastic left heart syndrome, a severe condition requiring immediate surgery.
West claimed the parents would not provide necessary resources. However, the New York Post reported that the couple has remained with their son in intensive care.
The RedState article notes that a guardian ad litem stated the parents “have followed the recommendations of the doctors to a T.” The baby is currently in a Texas children’s hospital receiving life-saving care.
West argued that moving the baby to California would be dangerous. She wanted to keep him in Texas where she could control his care. A Texas judge dismissed her claims last week. The Washington Examiner reported that the Texas Supreme Court denied her request to keep the baby in Texas. Now the parents can move the child to California for further treatment.
We must look at what happens when contracts are ignored. West signed an agreement that allowed for termination in specific cases. She chose to break that part of the deal. The law in California recognized the parents as the legal owners of the child. The Supreme Court did not overturn that decision. This leaves a hard question for other women considering surrogacy.
