She Refused to Terminate the Pregnancy. Now the Baby’s Biological Parents Are Suing Her for Six Figures

If you’re just hearing about McKenna West for the first time, the story is complicated — and the latest development has added another major twist.

West, a 28-year-old nurse from Alaska, agreed to become a surrogate for a California couple. What began as a planned surrogacy eventually turned into a bitter legal fight after doctors discovered a serious heart condition in the fetus and the intended parents wanted the pregnancy terminated.

West refused.

Now, after the baby has been born, the biological parents are suing her for more than $100,000.

How did this get so complicated?

West agreed to carry a baby for California couple Nausheen Gilkar and Omar Ahmed.

According to court documents and reports about the case, the couple paid West $60,000 under their surrogacy agreement.

But around the 20-week point in the pregnancy, doctors discovered that the fetus had hypoplastic left heart syndrome (HLHS) — a serious congenital heart defect affecting the left side of the heart.

The diagnosis changed the situation dramatically.

The couple decided they wanted to terminate the pregnancy.

West disagreed.

And that disagreement ultimately became the center of a legal battle spanning multiple states.

West refused to terminate the pregnancy

According to the biological parents’ lawsuit, their surrogacy agreement contained provisions addressing what would happen if the fetus developed a serious medical condition.

The parents argue that West violated the agreement by refusing to terminate the pregnancy.

West, however, maintained that she did not want to end the pregnancy and believed the baby should have the opportunity to live.

The dispute escalated as the pregnancy continued.

Then West went to Texas

West traveled to Texas while pregnant, bringing another layer of legal complications into the case.

Texas has some of the most restrictive abortion laws in the country, and West’s attorneys argued that Texas law protected her ability to make decisions regarding her pregnancy.

The case eventually became about more than whether West had breached a contract.

It became a fight over who had legal authority over the pregnancy — and eventually the baby.

The baby was born

West gave birth on August 12, 2026.

She reportedly named the baby Gabriel, while the biological parents say they named their son Rumi.

The baby was born with the serious heart condition doctors had diagnosed during the pregnancy and has required specialized medical care.

The biological parents have since obtained custody of the newborn.

West’s legal team, however, has continued fighting over her parental rights and her role in the child’s life.

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Michelle 📚📖👸🏽💄👠👛👑🦅💙 (@michellemeetsmedia)

And now there’s another lawsuit

The latest twist came Wednesday.

Gilkar and Ahmed have filed a lawsuit against West, accusing her of violating their surrogacy agreement.

They’re seeking more than $100,000 in damages.

The couple also alleges that West’s conduct was “outrageous” and malicious.

So this is no longer simply a disagreement between intended parents and a surrogate.

They’re now suing each other.

Why the case has people talking

The case raises some extremely difficult questions about surrogacy.

What happens when a surrogate agrees to certain terms but later refuses to follow them?

Can intended parents legally require a surrogate to terminate a pregnancy because of a serious fetal diagnosis?

And where does a surrogate’s right to make decisions about her own body end — and the contractual rights of the intended parents begin?

There is also the question of what happens when the baby is ultimately born despite the intended parents’ wishes.

Those questions don’t have simple answers, which is one reason this case has become such a legal and emotional mess.

The part that makes this especially complicated

At the center of all of this is now a newborn who needs medical treatment.

The biological parents say they are the baby’s legal and biological parents and that West broke the agreement she signed.

West’s side has argued that she should have parental rights and that she should not have been forced to terminate the pregnancy.

Both sides have very different versions of what the agreement meant and what should have happened after the baby’s diagnosis.

And now they’re taking those arguments to court.

This story isn’t over

For anyone just discovering the McKenna West case, the simplest way to understand it is this:

She agreed to become a surrogate.

The baby was diagnosed with a serious heart condition.

The biological parents wanted the pregnancy terminated.

West refused.

She continued the pregnancy and gave birth.

The biological parents obtained custody.

West challenged the situation in court.

And now the biological parents are seeking more than $100,000 from West in a lawsuit alleging that she breached their agreement and engaged in outrageous conduct.

The legal fight is continuing — and the questions surrounding this case could have implications far beyond West, the biological parents and one very complicated surrogacy agreement.

---

---