A same-sex couple in Canada is suing the surrogate mother of their son, two years after she refused their request to abort the fetus.
The suit, filed in Ontario Superior Court in May, alleges the surrogate failed to keep the parents informed about the baby's health, put the child at risk, caused emotional distress, and violated their confidentiality, according to the National Post.
The statement of claim does not explicitly mention the couple's request in June 2024 to terminate the pregnancy at 22 weeks, but the surrogate and the head of the agency that connected them both stated this disagreement was the first indication of trouble.
Sally Rhoads-Heinrich, owner of Surrogacy in Canada Online, said, "That's when everything changed... they wanted a termination." The surrogate insisted on further tests, and after specialists indicated the baby was healthy with a minor birth defect, the couple agreed to continue the pregnancy.
Tensions re-escalated when the surrogate insisted on a home birth, as agreed in their contract, and subsequently filed a small claims suit seeking reimbursement for out-of-pocket expenses. Shortly after filing her claim, which is now in arbitration, the surrogate learned she was being sued by the parents.
The surrogate, a single mother and corrections officer, said she initially became interested in surrogacy after seeing friends struggle with conception. She reported being contacted by numerous couples after her profile was listed on the Surrogacy Canada Online website.
After undergoing in vitro fertilization with donor eggs and embryos from each of the intended parents' sperm, the rapport was positive for the first few months. However, in late June 2024, after an ultrasound indicated the baby had a cleft lip, possibly a cleft palate, and a minor heart defect, the situation changed.
According to the surrogate, she received a letter from the "intending parents" requesting termination, citing the potential for a "genetic chromosomal or other abnormality or defect" as per their agreement. The letter stated the decision was "free and informed."
While officiating an international wrestling competition in the Dominican Republic at the time, the surrogate was reportedly devastated by the letter. She stated she would have considered abortion if the baby had no chance of survival but was uncomfortable terminating the pregnancy for what she perceived as a largely cosmetic defect.
Doctors at Mount Sinai Hospital in Toronto, specializing in obstetric care, later informed the couple that the baby had no issues beyond the cleft lip and was otherwise healthy. The surrogate stated that the parents then agreed to continue the pregnancy.
Further conflict arose over the birth plan. The surrogate favored a home birth with midwives, as originally planned, while the parents preferred a hospital delivery due to the cleft lip. The baby experienced breathing difficulties upon delivery but recovered after midwives administered oxygen and called an ambulance to transport him to the hospital.
From that point, the surrogate stated, the parents took the baby home and largely ceased communication. Subsequently, she requested reimbursement for approximately $10,000 in expenses, including lost income, missed pension contributions, and transportation costs. When she received no response, she filed a small claims suit, only to discover their contract mandated arbitration for monetary disputes.
Soon after, the parents' lawsuit emerged, alleging the surrogate's failure to update them on the fetus's health, negligent behavior that put the baby's health at risk, and a failure to follow the parents' discretion regarding medical decisions. The suit also claims the surrogate violated their confidentiality and caused severe emotional distress, with one parent reportedly unable to work from July 2, 2024, to September 2025.
The lawsuit does not specify damages, but the surrogate indicated the plaintiffs are seeking around $600,000. "You know I'm a single mom, you know I have a daughter and you're basically suing me for my house," she lamented. "It seems very s*****, it's just awful."
Rhoads-Heinrich highlighted the precarious position of surrogates in Canada, where commercial fees are prohibited, unlike in the U.S. Canadian surrogates can only be compensated for receipted expenses, often undertaking surrogacy to help others. However, some are left with unpaid costs or, in instances like this, face lawsuits when parents walk away.
"What I find most difficult in this is they are suing the woman who brought their son to them. How is their son going to feel some day if he learns that?" Rhoads-Heinrich questioned.
Juliet Guichon, a bioethics professor at the University of Calgary, echoed concerns about surrogates' vulnerability under Canadian law, noting the parents appear to be punishing the woman for allegedly breaching their agreement. Guichon added that the parents previously sought to end the fetus's life for a condition that "can be completely overcome by surgery and therapy." Based on available information, Guichon raised questions about whether it is in the child's best interest to be raised by these parents.