Key facts
- The Texas Supreme Court ruled that an infant born via surrogate can be moved to Los Angeles for treatment.
- The baby has hypoplastic left heart syndrome, a severe heart defect requiring extensive surgery.
- The court cited the need to sustain the life of the medically fragile child as the paramount concern.
- West had sought to block the biological parents from removing the child from Texas.
- Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton intervened in the dispute to ensure the baby would receive medical care.
The Texas Supreme Court on Thursday ruled that an infant born via surrogate can be relocated to Los Angeles for treatment of a severe heart defect. The decision came weeks after a California court had recognized the biological parents’ custody rights. The court stated that sustaining the life of the medically fragile child is the paramount concern in this time-sensitive matter. The infant, named Rumi by his biological parents, suffers from hypoplastic left heart syndrome, a condition that impedes blood flow and can be fatal without extensive surgery. The condition was detected when the baby was a fetus, prompting California couple Nausheen Gilkar and Omar Ahmed to ask that surrogate McKenna West terminate the pregnancy. West, who resides in Alaska, traveled to Texas to deliver the child, where abortion is illegal. West and her legal team maintain that the couple attempted to force her into having the procedure, while lawyers for Gilkar and Ahmed say West initially agreed to the abortion before initiating a legal battle for custody. The case has sparked debate around abortion and parental rights. Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton elevated the dispute's national profile when he intervened to ensure the baby would receive medical care after his birth. West had appealed to the US Supreme Court, suggesting Gilkar and Ahmed would opt for end-of-life care rather than continued treatment. West's lawyers stated that she was seeking to be informed about the baby's medical status and to advocate for her rights, noting that under Texas law she would ordinarily be deemed the mother by virtue of giving birth. The couple's attorneys denied claims of pursuing hospice care, arguing that siding with West would create confusion over medical decision-making authority.