On August 22, a baby was born in Texas, who has become the center of the pro-life vs pro-convenience debate. The baby is the product of a surrogacy agreement – an embryo from genetic parents (Nausheen Gilkar and Omar Ahmed) carried to term by a surrogate mother (Mckenna West).
When it was discovered late in the pregnancy that the baby had a serious (but treatable) heart defect, a legal battle commenced over
- The right of the surrogate mother to decide which medical treatments she must submit to (i.e. abortion),
- The custody of the newborn, and
- Who would legally make medical decisions for the child (both before and after birth).
The embryo donors demanded that the surrogate submit to an abortion – they didn’t want a defective baby, for convenience. The surrogate mother refused.
The surrogate mother initially named the baby Gabriel, after God’s trusted angel messenger. The DNA donors have renamed the baby Rumi, after their favorite Persian poet. I’m going to continue calling him Gabriel, because I still believe he is a messenger from God. To understand my reasoning, read this.
After my last posting about Gabriel, the situation in Texas has continued to evolve.
Custody has been awarded to the DNA donors, and West is prohibited from having any contact with Gabriel. I’ll be referring to the DNA donors, Nausheen Gilkar and Omar Ahmed, as the custodians for the remainder of this article. You’ll see why I refuse to call them parents later in this piece.
Gabriel has received the first of the lifesaving surgeries he needs for long-term survival. It is unclear if his custodians voluntarily chose life for him, or were forced to allow the surgery by the state. Texas is very protective of children, both before and after birth, and Attorney General Paxton was pushing for a court appointed guardian for Gabriel. AG Paxton dropped that request when the custodians agreed with Gabriel’s surgery. Interpret that as you will.
Gabriel is still in critical condition and is struggling for his life. he needs at least two more surgeries, and possibly a heart transplant later in life, to have any chance of long-term survival. One would think that loving parents would be cherishing every available second with their newborn – whether that turns out to be years or mere seconds.
But at least some of the custodian’s seconds aren’t being spent with their precious baby. Some of their time is being spent with their legal team. They are suing Ms. West for breach of contract – claiming their damages are $100,000.
Let me put that lawsuit in context, because it says something about the character of Gilkar and Ahmed.
CNN reports that on June 8, Gilkar and Ahmed sent a text to West stating:
We are not asking you to terminate this pregnancy and we do not intend to ask you to terminate this pregnancy.
Now 3 months later, they’re demanding $100K, because she didn’t terminate the pregnancy.
I’m starting to suspect that Gilkar’s and Ahmed’s June text to Ms. West was just a ruse, to avoid bad PR and keep West in a jurisdiction which would be friendly to their claim. They didn’t want her going someplace like Texas, which would … gasp … show some concern for the baby. But West did go to baby friendly Texas, and now the custodians are hellbent on payback.
That’s why I’m calling Gilkar and Ahmed custodians rather than parents. The legal system has given them custody, but only their behavior can make them parents – a test which they have failed miserably. They continue to place their wishes above the welfare of Gabriel – their convenience ahead of his life.
Have they even considered the long-term fallout of their lawsuit against West? Real parents would have. Not only does their suit keep the matter of Baby Gabriel in the news for months to come, but it makes their wishes about him part of the public record. Their choice of their convenience over his life, is now part of an official court filing.
Reporters are going to be checking up on “Rumi” for years to come. Has it even occurred to the custodians what will happen to their relationship with “Rumi” when he becomes a teenager and starts wondering what all the hubbub is about?
With a simple ChatGPT inquiry, “Rumi” will learn that
- He is the product of a surrogacy contract,
- His surrogate mother originally named him Gabriel,
- His birth was the subject of an intense pro-life vs pro-convenience battle,
- His “parents” were on the pro-convenience side of the fight, and
- The one person who fought for his survival, was sued into destitution by … his “parents.”
That should make for an interesting Thanksgiving dinner, don’t you think? I won’t even speculate about the long-term emotional damage; such a discovery might cause.
In the Bible, when King Solomon was faced by two women claiming a single baby was hers, he awarded the baby to the mother who placed the child’s welfare above her own. In Texas we currently have two custodians, playing make-believe parents while sacrificing a healthy relationship with their child, to pursue retribution from a woman who defied their will … to save their child. I’d say that’s a Solomonic fail.
Author Bio: John Green is a political refugee from Minnesota, now on strike in Galt’s Gulch – which the locals call Idaho. He is a retired engineer who spent much of his career applying engineering principles to organizational development (yes, really). He has written for The American Spectator, Convention of States Action, and American Free News Network. He can be reached at greenjeg@gmail.com.
If you enjoyed this article, then please REPOST or SHARE with others; encourage them to follow AFNN. If you’d like to become a citizen contributor for AFNN, contact us at managingeditor@afnn.us Help keep us ad-free by donating here.
Substack: American Free News Network Substack
Truth Social: @AFNN_USA
Facebook: https://m.facebook.com/afnnusa
Telegram: https://t.me/joinchat/2_-GAzcXmIRjODNh
Twitter: https://twitter.com/AfnnUsa
GETTR: https://gettr.com/u