The baby boy at the center of an out-of-state surrogacy battle that is pitting the Texas attorney general against the California biological parents was born in Dallas on Wednesday, lawyers for the birth parents and the surrogate confirmed.
The child, who has a congenital heart issue, was born via a surrogate, McKenna West, of Alaska, who had traveled to Texas after she said the child’s biological parents had tried to force her to terminate the pregnancy, something the child’s biological parents deny.
“Our clients’ child was born earlier this morning and he is now receiving medical care provided by a team of pediatric experts,” Lee Budner said in a statement to The Texas Tribune, speaking for his clients Nausheen Gilkar and Omar Ahmed, the biological parents of the baby. “McKenna West’s baseless attempts to intervene in the child’s medical care have been soundly rejected by the courts.”
Gilkar and Ahmed are at the hospital with the baby, who they say is not named Gabriel, despite Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton and West calling the baby by that name.
The couple’s attorney said the baby is receiving medical care and accused West and Paxton of turning a family tragedy into “political theater.”
“Our clients’ only focus at this time is ensuring that their baby receives the medical care that he vitally needs and that they, as his parents, are able to spend every precious moment they can with him,” Budner said.
The baby West was carrying was diagnosed with hypoplastic left heart syndrome — where the left side of the heart is underdeveloped — at 20 weeks of pregnancy. West asked a Dallas court to recognize her parental right as the birth mother to intervene in medical treatment for the baby.
On Tuesday, Paxton announced he was intervening on behalf of West, alleging Gilkar and Ahmed refused to consent to life-saving surgery for the heart issue — Budner did not address this in his statement — and were trying to bring the child back to California before he was born.
On Tuesday, a Dallas judge ordered that the child be given life-saving treatment upon birth and that the child must remain in Texas.
In a separate order, the judge also granted the birth parents’ request that prevents West from making any medical decision for the child and representing herself as the child’s mother, reinforcing the couple’s rights as the parents.
A hearing on the matter is scheduled for Aug. 25.
[…]
According to court documents their attorneys filed in Alaska, parents consulted with specialists in Los Angeles and Dallas and had determined that their chosen course of action was to have West deliver in California and the baby who they call Rumi would then begin lifelong treatment there.
“West is harming Rumi by relocating to Texas, requiring him to be born in Texas, away from his parents and the specialized cardiac team in Los Angeles that will provide his lifelong care,” the court filing states. “Her actions are forcing Rumi to begin treatment (including critical heart surgery) in one state and be transferred to another.”
A California trial court has already established that the couple are the rightful parents of the child West was carrying as a surrogate. An appellate court rejected West’s request to stop the trial court judgment from taking effect.
West is seeking legal protection in Texas because the state’s family law recognizes anyone who gives birth in Texas as the legal mother of that child.
Despite the California rulings and the Dallas judge’s Tuesday ruling, Wilson still argues that West “is lawfully the parent because she gave birth to this child that she carries in Texas, then she should control custody as well.”
Here’s the original story, which ran on Tuesday before the child was born and before any court rulings came down. Let me see if I can sum up the key points here:
1. The state of Texas is for parents’ rights, except when it disagrees with the parents’ decisions.
2. The state of Texas is against “birth tourism”, except when it’s not.
Have I missed anything? We live in truly stupid times. I’ll keep an eye on this.