Trump administration steps into surrogate’s battle over baby with a heart defect biological parents asked her to abort
The Trump administration has intervened in a legal dispute over a newborn with a life-threatening heart defect, born to an Alaska surrogate for a California couple. Surrogate McKenna West says the intended parents asked her to terminate the pregnancy after the diagnosis; they deny intending to withhold necessary treatment. The case has become a prominent test of parental decision-making, surrogacy contracts and abortion politics across state lines.
West travelled to Texas, where abortion is heavily restricted, and gave birth to a boy with hypoplastic left heart syndrome after a Dallas judge ordered hospitals to provide life-sustaining care. Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton supported the intervention, while the couple say West breached their surrogacy agreement and a California court found she had no custody rights. The condition affects about 925 US babies annually and typically requires several complex operations, with some children later needing a heart transplant.
- Federal and Texas officials joined a disputed surrogacy case.
- Parents and surrogate disagree over abortion and treatment.
- The newborn faces multiple high-risk heart operations.
New here? Start with this
Surrogacy is an arrangement in which a woman carries a pregnancy for other people, usually under a legal agreement setting out who will be the child’s parents and how medical decisions will be made. In the United States, the rules differ between states, and disputes can involve courts in more than one place.
Hypoplastic left heart syndrome is a rare condition in which the left side of a baby’s heart does not develop properly. Babies born with it usually need urgent specialist treatment, often involving several major operations and sometimes a heart transplant later in life.
The case raises questions about who can make decisions for a baby before and after birth: the woman who carried the pregnancy, the intended parents, or the courts. It also sits within wider arguments over abortion restrictions, the enforceability of surrogacy agreements and the powers of state authorities when families live in different states.