En esta noticia
A legal dispute between a California couple and their surrogate has moved to a Dallas courtroom after the woman continued the pregnancy following a fetal diagnosis and gave birth to a baby with a serious heart condition.
The case involves Nausheen Gilkar and Omar Ahmed, a couple from Los Angeles, and McKenna West, a nurse from Alaska who agreed to serve as their surrogate. The baby was born in Dallas on August 12 and remains in critical condition after undergoing heart surgery.
The dispute is now focused on who has the legal authority to make decisions for the child. Gilkar and Ahmed say they are his legal parents, while West is asking a Texas court to recognize her parental rights and give her custody.
Why did the pregnancy become a legal dispute?
Gilkar and Ahmed had turned to surrogacy after eight unsuccessful rounds of in vitro fertilization. Gilkar later underwent a hysterectomy, and the couple contracted with West in August 2025 to carry an embryo created from Gilkar’s egg and Ahmed’s sperm.
This means West was a gestational surrogate, rather than the baby’s genetic mother. In this type of surrogacy, the surrogate carries a pregnancy created using an embryo from the intended parents or donors, and the surrogate does not provide the egg. Texas law specifically distinguishes gestational agreements from situations in which the woman who gives birth is also the genetic mother.
The arrangement changed in April, when doctors detected hypoplastic left heart syndrome (HLHS) in the fetus at about 20 weeks of pregnancy. The condition is a serious congenital heart defect in which the left side of the heart is underdeveloped and cannot properly support blood flow.
According to testimony and court records, the surrogacy agreement included a provision under which West agreed to terminate the pregnancy if a fetal abnormality was detected and the intended parents requested an abortion. Gilkar testified that she and Ahmed subsequently asked West to terminate the pregnancy.
West scheduled abortion appointments but ultimately decided not to go through with the procedure. She testified that she believed the baby had a chance of surviving with medical treatment.
Why did West go to Texas?
West moved to Texas on July 15, according to her testimony, after deciding to continue the pregnancy. She had previously been receiving medical care in California.
Texas has some of the most restrictive abortion laws in the country. State law generally prohibits performing or inducing an abortion, with a limited exception when a licensed physician determines that a pregnant patient has a life-threatening physical condition or faces a serious risk of substantial impairment of a major bodily function without the procedure.
However, the available court testimony does not establish that West moved to Texas solely because abortion is illegal there. She testified that she considered Texas because she had friends there and believed she could stay with them. The legal significance of the move is that the pregnancy and subsequent birth took place in a state with different laws governing abortion and parental rights.
West gave birth prematurely in Dallas on August 12. The couple named the baby Rumi, while West has used the name Gabriel.
The fight over custody
Before the birth, a California court had issued an order recognizing Gilkar and Ahmed as the child’s legal parents and excluding West from parental authority, according to the couple’s attorneys and court records.
After West moved to Texas, however, she sought relief from a Dallas court. Her attorneys argue that because she gave birth in Texas, she should be considered the child’s mother under Texas law and that the surrogacy agreement should not be treated as valid for purposes of the current dispute. The couple’s lawyers argue that the California order recognizing them as the parents should be respected in Texas.
The case is being heard by Dallas County District Judge Ashley Wysocki in the 301st District Court. The Texas judiciary’s official directory lists Wysocki as the judge of the 301st District Court in Dallas County.
At a hearing on August 25, Wysocki heard testimony from Gilkar and West and arguments from their attorneys. The judge did not make a final decision on custody or parental rights.
Instead, she extended a temporary restraining order for 14 days. The order prevents West from seeing the baby or making medical decisions for him while the court considers the case.
What happens next
The baby remains under medical care in Dallas and has already undergone the first major heart surgery required because of his condition. Additional procedures may be necessary as he grows.
The immediate legal question is whether West can establish parental or custody rights in Texas despite the California order recognizing Gilkar and Ahmed as the parents.