A Surrogate Went to Texas to Save a Baby: Here's the Legal Fight That Followed

A baby boy born with a serious heart defect arrived in Dallas on August 12, 2026. His surrogate, McKenna West, an Alaska nurse, had traveled to Texas on purpose to stop the biological parents from ending the pregnancy and to make sure the baby got medical care after birth.

Lee Budner, a lawyer for the biological parents, Nausheen Gilkar and Omar Ahmed of California, confirmed the birth. He said the baby was born that morning and was being treated by a team of children's medical specialists. Gilkar and Ahmed have said they did not force West to have an abortion.

At 20 weeks of pregnancy, doctors found that the baby had hypoplastic left heart syndrome, or HLHS. This means the left side of the heart did not grow properly, so the heart struggles to pump oxygen-rich blood to the body. According to the CDC, babies with HLHS need several surgeries starting right after birth. These surgeries are not a cure, and health problems can continue for life.

The disagreement comes down to who says what. In a July court filing in Alaska, lawyers for Gilkar and Ahmed said everyone initially agreed to end the pregnancy, that West made the first appointment to do so, and that she later changed her mind, stopped responding to them, and canceled medical permissions. West, on Megyn Kelly's podcast, said the surrogacy contract left her feeling trapped and that she wanted to protect the baby.

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton stepped in. He publicized an emergency court order from Dallas County that stopped the fetus from being taken out of Texas and asked local hospitals to provide life-saving care. In a news release, Paxton called the child "baby Gabriel," a name West had chosen but the California couple had not. Texas law bans abortion in most cases except to protect a pregnant person's health, though critics say the wording of that exception is vague and hard to enforce. West, as a nurse, would have understood the medical details of the diagnosis.

Budner called West and Paxton's actions "political theater" in comments to the Texas Tribune.

The bigger picture here is that this case tests several legal questions at the same time. A surrogacy contract is an agreement where a woman carries a pregnancy for someone else who will raise the child. These contracts usually spell out what happens if the baby has a serious health problem. But when the surrogate and the parents disagree on whether to continue the pregnancy, there is no clear national set of rules for sorting it out. Gilkar and Ahmed live in California, West lives in Alaska, and the baby was born in Texas. That means the laws of three different states could each apply to parts of this dispute.

Paxton's involvement raises its own questions. The biological parents do not live in Texas. West went there specifically because of the state's strict abortion laws and to get a court order for the baby's medical care. The Dallas County court's emergency order used Texas abortion law to go against the parents' wishes, no matter what the surrogacy contract says or what California or Alaska law might allow. Whether a Texas court can make decisions about a pregnancy involving people from other states, and whether Paxton has the authority to intervene when no main party lives in Texas, are questions this case brings up but does not yet settle.

The medical side matters too. HLHS is one of the most serious heart defects a baby can be born with. The CDC says the required surgeries are not a cure, and lasting complications are possible. That means the child will need ongoing specialized care, and who gets to make decisions about that care is still being fought over between West and the biological parents.

The question of parental rights is still unresolved. The biological parents say through their lawyer that they did not force an abortion. West says the contract took away her choices. Paxton has used his position to frame the issue as protecting a fetus under Texas law. The baby is now born and receiving care, and the legal fight over who gets to make decisions for him will enter a new phase, but no court has ruled yet on who actually holds parental rights.