A California couple and their surrogate testified Tuesday in a Texas court, each presenting a deeply personal and conflicting account of their dispute over a newborn with a life-threatening heart defect. The case has drawn the attention of right-to-life groups and GOP officials.
Nausheen Gilkar, one of the intended parents, told the court that the child, whom they named Rumi, is their son and that the surrogate, McKenna West, is unstable and attempting to take him from them. "He's our child," Gilkar said, adding that the baby's condition has worsened. Court documents filed by the couple's attorney indicated the infant was in critical condition and suffering potential complications following a procedure after birth.
West, a nurse who traveled from Alaska to Texas to give birth on August 12, has named the child Gabriel and is seeking sole conservatorship to make medical decisions. She testified that she was 23 weeks pregnant when the couple urged her to terminate the pregnancy. West stated she was not comfortable with the abortion and believed the baby had a strong chance of survival and a long life, despite the diagnosis.
The infant has hypoplastic left heart syndrome, a congenital defect affecting one side of the heart, which can be fatal without timely treatment. Gilkar described the baby's struggles since surgery, including gasping for air, choking on tubes, and requiring a blood transfusion. "He's the most beautiful person I've never seen," Gilkar said. "He's the love of our lives. He's suffering a lot."
Attorneys for West have argued that Gilkar and Omar Ahmed, the other intended parent, were not committed to ensuring the baby received life-saving surgeries, pointing to their prior request for an abortion. West indicated in court that she would drop custody claims if the couple demonstrated commitment to the child's medical procedures. When questioned about their earlier desire to terminate the pregnancy, Gilkar stated she did not regret the decision. The surrogate's attorney asked Gilkar if she would trust someone to care for her child who had wanted the child dead.
Gilkar and Ahmed allege West violated the surrogacy contract signed in August 2025. Gilkar testified that she underwent eight rounds of in vitro fertilization in Los Angeles and a hysterectomy, making surrogacy her only option. She stated she was present with West during the IVF transfer and held her hand.
West's attorneys have also referenced California court records suggesting she has no parental rights. West is seeking to have that ruling disregarded, asserting her willingness to fight for the child since learning of the diagnosis.
Surrogacy laws vary significantly by state, as there is no federal regulation, creating potential ambiguities in such cases. The judge did not issue a final ruling on custody or conservatorship on Tuesday, and a restraining order preventing West from seeing or holding the child remained in effect.