Who Is McKenna West? Surrogacy, Abortion And Baby Rumi Custody Controversy Explained

McKenna West is an Alaska cardiac nurse and gestational surrogate at the center of a multistate legal battle over abortion, surrogacy contracts, parental rights and custody of a baby born with a severe congenital heart defect.

West agreed to carry a child for California couple Nausheen Gilkar and Omar Ahmed. During the pregnancy, doctors diagnosed the fetus with hypoplastic left heart syndrome, or HLHS. The intended parents decided to terminate the pregnancy under a provision in their surrogacy agreement, but West ultimately refused to undergo the abortion. She later traveled from Alaska to Texas, gave birth on August 12, 2026, and began challenging court rulings recognizing Gilkar and Ahmed as the child’s legal parents.

The dispute has since involved courts in California, Alaska and Texas, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, anti-abortion legal organization Alliance Defending Freedom and, as of September 9, the U.S. Supreme Court. West has asked the Supreme Court to temporarily block the California parentage judgment while she prepares a petition asking the justices to review her challenge.

Who Is McKenna West?

West is a 28-year-old cardiac nurse who was living in Anchorage, Alaska, when she entered the surrogacy arrangement. She agreed to serve as the gestational carrier for Gilkar and Ahmed, a Los Angeles-area couple who turned to surrogacy after Gilkar underwent infertility treatments and a hysterectomy. [AP] [Texas Tribune]

West is the gestational carrier in the dispute. The central legal fight concerns whether she has parental or custodial rights despite the parties’ surrogacy contract and California’s judgment recognizing the intended parents.

What Did McKenna West’s Surrogacy Agreement Say?

West and the intended parents entered a written gestational-surrogacy agreement in August 2025. Court documents reported by TMZ show that the contract addressed what would happen if doctors discovered a fetal abnormality during the pregnancy. [TMZ]

According to the agreement filed in court, it stated that the pregnancy would be terminated for a fetal abnormality if the intended parents requested it. The agreement also stated that West had considered the possibility of termination and intended to follow the intended parents’ request. [TMZ]

The contract called for West to receive $60,000 in installments. TMZ reported that the payment schedule provided for 10 monthly payments of $6,000. The intended parents later said they had paid West $60,000 during the pregnancy. [TMZ] [TMZ]

The agreement also restricted West’s travel late in the pregnancy and stated that she was not responsible for naming the child. [TMZ]

What Was The Baby Diagnosed With?

Doctors diagnosed the fetus with hypoplastic left heart syndrome during the pregnancy. HLHS is a critical congenital heart defect in which structures on the left side of the heart do not develop properly, preventing normal blood flow. [CDC]

The condition generally requires a series of operations beginning shortly after birth. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention describes three typical stages of surgery: the Norwood procedure soon after birth, a second operation generally performed several months later and a third operation later in childhood. The procedures do not cure HLHS but are designed to allow the heart to circulate blood more effectively. [CDC]

Why Did The Intended Parents Want To Terminate The Pregnancy?

Gilkar and Ahmed decided to terminate the pregnancy after learning of the HLHS diagnosis. Their surrogacy agreement gave them contractual authority to request termination under specified circumstances involving a fetal abnormality. [AP] [TMZ]

West testified that she made an abortion appointment while approximately 23 weeks pregnant but became uncomfortable with going through with the procedure. [Texas Tribune]

Why Did McKenna West Refuse The Abortion?

West told the surrogacy agency in May that she could not go through with terminating the pregnancy. Letters later filed in court show that she informed Worldwide Surrogacy Specialists of her decision on May 4, 2026. West wrote that she had become emotionally attached to the fetus and feared she would be unable to live with herself if she proceeded with the abortion. [TMZ]

West subsequently argued that the baby’s heart condition was treatable and that he should be given the opportunity to undergo the surgeries associated with HLHS. [Texas Tribune]

Did McKenna West Say She Was Threatened With A $250,000 Penalty?

West alleges she was threatened with major financial consequences if she refused to terminate the pregnancy. In a lawsuit against Worldwide Surrogacy, West claimed a lawyer involved in the arrangement told her that she could face a $250,000 financial penalty for failing to follow the termination provision. [TMZ]

That assertion is West’s allegation and is disputed.

Worldwide Surrogacy denied threatening or coercing West. Vicki Ferrara, who operates Worldwide Surrogacy Specialists, challenged West’s allegations in court and sought dismissal of her lawsuit. [TMZ]

Why Did McKenna West Go To Texas?

West traveled from Alaska to Texas late in the pregnancy as the legal dispute intensified. Texas prohibits most abortions and has different laws governing parentage and surrogacy than California. West’s attorneys later argued that because she gave birth in Texas, Texas law should recognize her as the child’s mother. [AP] [Texas Tribune]

The intended parents argued that the California parentage judgment controlled and that West had breached their agreement by leaving Alaska and attempting to assert parental rights over their child. [Texas Tribune]

What Did The California Court Decide?

A Los Angeles County judge entered a judgment recognizing Gilkar and Ahmed as the child’s parents on June 22, 2026. West challenged the California court’s jurisdiction over her, arguing that she was an Alaska resident and had not consented to the California court’s authority. [Supreme Court Filing]

The California court treated West’s participation in the proceeding as a general appearance and entered the parentage judgment. West appealed and repeatedly sought to have enforcement of the judgment stayed. [Supreme Court Filing]

California appellate courts rejected several emergency writ requests, and the California Supreme Court denied West’s petition for review and request for a stay on August 26. [Supreme Court Filing]

How Did Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton Get Involved?

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton intervened shortly before the baby’s birth. His office asked a Texas court to require the hospital caring for the baby to provide life-sustaining medical treatment. The case quickly became a national political issue because Paxton and anti-abortion groups portrayed the dispute as a fight to protect the child’s life. [AP]

A Texas judge appointed a guardian ad litem for the baby, ordered life-sustaining care and initially barred the infant from being removed from Texas. At the same time, the court recognized the California judgment for purposes of giving Gilkar and Ahmed authority over their child. [Supreme Court Filing]

Paxton’s involvement was criticized by the intended parents’ attorney, who said the family was being subjected to political theater while dealing with a critically ill newborn. [AP]

What Role Did Alliance Defending Freedom Play?

Alliance Defending Freedom represents West in portions of the legal fight. The conservative Christian legal organization, which opposes abortion, publicly praised West for refusing to terminate the pregnancy and argued that the baby should receive continued life-saving medical treatment. [Alliance Defending Freedom]

Anti-abortion activists also helped West travel to Texas, further turning what began as a private surrogacy disagreement into a high-profile political and legal controversy. [AP]

When Was The Baby Born?

West gave birth in Texas on August 12, 2026. West refers to the child as Gabriel, while Gilkar and Ahmed named their son Rumi. [AP]

For clarity, the child’s legal parents refer to him as Rumi, while West and organizations supporting her have frequently used the name Gabriel.

Who Got Custody After The Birth?

Gilkar and Ahmed received physical custody and medical decision-making authority following the birth. A temporary restraining order prohibited West from making medical decisions for the child, taking possession of him, presenting herself as his parent or guardian, signing documents for him or interfering with the intended parents’ access. [TMZ]

The California judgment recognizing Gilkar and Ahmed as parents formed the legal basis for much of that authority.

Did The Baby Have Heart Surgery?

Yes. Rumi underwent the first major operation required to treat HLHS. His parents authorized the surgery, and their attorney said it took place on August 17. [People]

The baby remained critically ill following the operation. At an August 25 hearing, Gilkar testified about serious complications and the intensive treatment he was receiving. [Texas Tribune]

Why Was There A Fight Over Medical Care If The Parents Authorized Surgery?

West’s attorneys argued that the intended parents could not be trusted to guarantee future life-saving treatment because they had initially sought an abortion. They sought to give West authority to advocate for the baby’s continuing medical care. [Texas Tribune]

Gilkar and Ahmed rejected suggestions that they did not care about their child. They told the Texas court that Rumi was wanted and loved and emphasized that medical decisions should be made with his doctors based on his condition. [CBS Texas] [Texas Tribune]

West testified that if the court were satisfied that Gilkar and Ahmed were committed to the surgeries the baby medically required, she would abandon her effort to obtain custody. [Texas Tribune]

Is McKenna West Trying To Get Custody Of The Baby?

West has asked Texas courts to recognize her as having parental rights and sought sole managing conservatorship. Her attorneys argue that Texas law recognizes the woman who gives birth as a mother unless another valid legal determination controls. [TMZ] [Supreme Court Filing]

Gilkar and Ahmed say West is attempting to take a child she agreed to carry for them and whom a California court already determined was legally theirs. At the August 25 hearing, Gilkar became emotional while testifying that Rumi was their child. [AP]

Did McKenna West Ask The Intended Parents For Child Support?

Gilkar and Ahmed alleged in court papers that West had sought financial support while pursuing parental rights, but West denied asking for child support. West said the characterization of her requests was inaccurate. [TMZ]

The dispute over support is part of the parties’ broader litigation and should not be treated as an established finding that West sought child support.

Are The Intended Parents Suing McKenna West?

Yes. Gilkar and Ahmed filed claims seeking more than $100,000 in damages. They accuse West of breaching the surrogacy agreement and seek additional damages over conduct they characterize in their legal filings as malicious and outrageous. [TMZ]

West denies wrongdoing and has sought to have their claims dismissed. [TMZ]

The lawsuit allegations have not been finally adjudicated.

What Happened At The August 25 Texas Hearing?

A Dallas judge heard testimony from West and the intended parents but did not immediately issue a final custody decision. Gilkar testified that she and her husband loved Rumi and described his deteriorating health after surgery. West testified about her decision to refuse the abortion and her concerns about future medical treatment. [AP] [Texas Tribune]

The court left restrictions against West in place while the dispute continued. [CBS Texas]

What Happened In Texas On September 2?

The Texas court recognized the California parentage judgment and dismissed West from the Texas proceeding with prejudice. West’s September 9 Supreme Court filing states that the Dallas County court gave full faith and credit to the California judgment on September 2. [Supreme Court Filing]

That ruling left West without a role in the Texas case and prompted her to continue challenging the California judgment through higher courts.

Why Did McKenna West Go To The U.S. Supreme Court?

West filed an emergency application with the Supreme Court on September 9, 2026. The case is docketed as M.W. v. Superior Court of California, Los Angeles County, et al., No. 26A325. [Supreme Court]

West is asking Justice Elena Kagan, who handles emergency matters arising from the Ninth Circuit, to temporarily stay the California parentage judgment while she prepares a petition for a writ of certiorari. [Supreme Court Filing]

Her Supreme Court argument focuses heavily on jurisdiction and due process. West contends that the California court never properly obtained personal jurisdiction over her and improperly treated her attempt to challenge jurisdiction as consent to the court’s authority. She argues that suspending the California judgment would allow her to seek reinstatement in the Texas proceedings. Those are West’s legal arguments, not findings by the Supreme Court. [Supreme Court Filing]

As of September 10, the Supreme Court docket showed West’s emergency application as submitted to Justice Kagan and did not list a ruling on the request. [Supreme Court]

Why Does The McKenna West Case Matter For Surrogacy Law?

The dispute exposes major differences among state surrogacy and parentage laws. There is no single federal surrogacy law establishing uniform rules nationwide. Instead, parentage, enforceability of gestational-carrier agreements and related reproductive issues are largely governed by individual states. [AP]

California has well-developed procedures for gestational-surrogacy agreements and pre-birth parentage judgments. Texas law has different requirements, and West’s decision to give birth there created competing arguments about which state’s parentage rules should control. [Texas Tribune]

The case also raises a separate question about how far a surrogacy contract can go in addressing abortion. West agreed in advance to a provision giving the intended parents authority to request termination for a fetal abnormality but later concluded she could not personally undergo the procedure. The resulting litigation has placed contractual obligations, a pregnant woman’s control over her body and the intended parents’ rights over a planned pregnancy into direct conflict.

McKenna West’s Separate Alaska Custody Dispute

The father of one of West’s own children filed a separate custody case in Alaska in September. TMZ reported that Robert Gross, who says he and West share a son born in 2021, filed a petition on September 2 asking for sole decision-making authority over their child. [TMZ]

Gross alleges in the filing that West’s actions surrounding the Texas surrogacy dispute raise concerns about her judgment and asks that her visits with their son be supervised. Those are allegations made by Gross in a separate family-law case and have not been established as findings of fact. [TMZ]

The Alaska custody dispute is separate from the litigation over Rumi and does not establish whether West’s arguments in the surrogacy case are legally valid.

What Is The Latest Development In The McKenna West Surrogacy Case?

The newest major development is West’s September 9 emergency appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court. She is seeking to suspend the California judgment that recognizes Gilkar and Ahmed as the child’s legal parents while she pursues further Supreme Court review. [Supreme Court]

The Supreme Court had not issued a decision on that emergency request as of September 10, 2026. The underlying California appeal and other litigation arising from the surrogacy arrangement also remain part of the broader dispute. [Supreme Court Filing]