Supreme Court declines to intervene in dispute over surrogate who refused to abort baby 

The Supreme Court declined to intervene Tuesday in a heated custody battle between a baby’s biological parents and a surrogate that sparked national debate over abortion and surrogacy.

Justice Elena Kagan denied an emergency request from surrogate McKenna West, who asked the justices to pause a California ruling that made the baby’s biological parents his legal parents, saying it had shut her out of decisions and information about his care.

The case began when a California couple demanded that West, from Alaska, have an abortion after they discovered the baby had hypoplastic left heart syndrome – a serious but treatable heart condition that typically requires multiple surgeries.

The heart condition, which was discovered at West’s 20-week anatomy scan, is “fatal within days of birth” if left untreated, but a series of medical procedures, including a surgery within days of birth, would offer the baby “a near-100% chance of survival beyond his first year,” a court filing for West indicates. But the biological parents “didn’t want a child with that condition,” the filing continues, so they demanded that West abort the baby, whom West calls Gabriel and the biological parents call Rumi.

West said she “could not live with herself if she terminated ‘this precious baby’ whom she felt moving in her womb, and she hoped that the couple would have a change of heart,” her legal filing reads. She offered to let the biological parents cut ties so they had no financial obligations to the child, which she offered to raise herself or arrange an adoption.

West ultimately fled to Texas, where she gave birth to the baby in August and received legal support from the state, ensuring that the child could receive lifesaving medical care.

Kagan’s refusal to intervene in the case, which had no explanation, leaves the lower court’s ruling in place, declaring the California couple the legal parents of the baby.

“While disappointed at the Supreme Court’s ruling, McKenna takes great comfort in how these legal proceedings have prompted the contracting parents to say they are committed to provide the baby with the lifesaving care he needs,” West’s lawyer, Lincoln Davis Wilson, told Heartlander News. “That’s what McKenna has been fighting for from day one.”

Wilson said West’s sole focus through the legal saga had been to “protect the life of the baby she carried.”

“The contracting parents pose in their legal papers as the sole defenders of the baby’s life. Nothing could be further from the truth,” Wilson added. “They demanded that McKenna abort the baby as soon as they learned of his medical condition. They refused to commit to his lifesaving care until a court order, entered over their objection, forced their hand. And even now after his birth, they remain under a court order to continue providing that care. Every life-saving decision has been made for them, not by them.”

He added that the California couple is suing West for more than $100,000 in compensatory damages “all for simply choosing life for the baby.”

An attorney for the California parents, Adam Wolf, told Heartlander News that the child will continue receiving medical care.

“We are grateful that Rumi can continue receiving the treatment he needs to survive, and that he will not be stripped away from his parents, who are ensuring their child receives top-notch medical care,” he said. “Ms. West’s legal filings across three states, numerous courts of appeals, and now the U.S. Supreme Court have sought to undermine Rumi’s parents’ right to provide him with the care he needs. Those efforts have been rejected by every single court.”