Biological parents sue surrogate for over $100,000 after she refused to abort baby with heart condition

A surrogate mother in the United States, McKenna West, has been sued for more than $100,000 after she refused to terminate a pregnancy involving a baby diagnosed with a serious heart condition.

The biological parents, Nausheen Gilkar and Omar Ahmed, claim West breached their surrogacy agreement after doctors discovered that the unborn baby had hypoplastic left heart syndrome (HLHS), a rare and life-threatening heart defect.

According to court documents reported by TMZ, the couple had paid West $60,000 during the pregnancy and argued that the agreement contained provisions covering pregnancy termination under certain circumstances.

Surrogate refuses abortion request

The dispute reportedly began when the baby was diagnosed with HLHS at around 20 weeks of pregnancy. The biological parents asked West to terminate the pregnancy, but she ultimately refused and carried the baby to term.

The baby was born in Texas on August 12, 2026, and has since undergone the Norwood procedure, the first of three complex surgeries commonly required for children born with HLHS.

The biological parents have denied forcing or threatening West to have an abortion. Their lawyers have reportedly argued that she initially agreed to terminate the pregnancy and even scheduled the procedure before changing her mind.

West has denied wrongdoing and is asking the court to dismiss the lawsuit.

Legal battle attracts attention

The biological parents are seeking more than $100,000 in damages, including compensation over what they described as West’s “malicious, outrageous conduct.”

Their lawyer, Lee Budner, confirmed that the baby underwent surgery and said his condition remains serious.

Meanwhile, West is seeking parental rights over the child and has received legal support from pro-life organisation Live Action.

Its founder, Lila Rose, criticised the lawsuit, saying, “This child is alive today and recovering from his first life-saving surgery because McKenna had the courage to say no.”

The case has sparked wider debate over surrogacy contracts, abortion, disability, parental rights and the legal limits of agreements involving pregnancy.