I'm the surrogate mother who refused parents' abortion demand — why I'm fighting for this precious baby boy
By: McKenna West
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
Surrogate mother McKenna West was horrified when the parents of the baby she was carrying ordered her to abort the child over a birth defect. West moved to Texas and gave birth, with the biological parents taking the child. With the two sides still locked in a legal battle, West tells The Post the only thing she wants:
I'm a mom and cardiac nurse from Alaska, and I've spent my career keeping people alive. Never in my wildest dreams did I imagine I'd spend this year fighting in courtrooms in three states to preserve the heartbeat of a baby I delivered myself.
Surrogate mom on defying abort order
Due to the onslaught of media coverage about my case — some true, some not — I'd like to set the record straight on what happened and why I'm fighting for this precious baby boy.
Last year, I agreed to be a surrogate for a couple in California. In April, when I was 20 weeks pregnant with the child, a routine ultrasound revealed the reason I now find myself embroiled in multiple bitter legal battles: The baby I carried had hypoplastic left heart syndrome, a serious, but treatable, congenital heart defect.
To treat a baby with HLHS, surgeons perform a staged repair, beginning with the Norwood procedure shortly after birth, followed by two more surgeries. This medical treatment gives children a high chance of going on to live full lives.
Yet when the contracting couple heard about the HLHS diagnosis, my worst fears came true: They ordered me to terminate the pregnancy. They wanted me to abort the precious child I was carrying.
A great shot at survival
No woman should be forced to kill the baby inside her. Most importantly, every child deserves a chance to live.
As a cardiac nurse, I knew this little one had a great shot at survival if given the opportunity to receive the necessary treatment.
After I communicated to the contracting couple that I could not end this baby's life, their lawyer and my own former lawyer sent me letters threatening six-figure penalties if I didn't comply with their demand to terminate. The contracting couple cut off my payments, and I covered the rest of the pregnancy expenses myself.
"Never in my wildest dreams did I imagine I'd spend this year fighting in courtrooms in three states to preserve the heartbeat of a baby I delivered myself," West writes. McKenna West
The threats eventually became real: The contracting couple filed claims against me in Alaska demanding at least one hundred thousand dollars $100,000 because I did not end their son's life.
But no threat or amount of money could sway my conviction that this baby had a real chance at a full life, and I could not participate in killing him and depriving him of that opportunity. All I wanted was for the contracting couple to commit to giving this baby lifesaving treatment. But they refused.
So, I made my own plans to save him. My home state didn't have a hospital equipped with the surgery he'd need at birth. After extensive research, I found a hospital in Texas with excellent surgical outcomes, including a 100% survival rate for the Norwood procedure. I also had friends in the area who could support my kids and me through this difficult time.
The contracting couple wanted me to deliver the baby at a hospital in California, but that hospital didn't have the same perfect track record of success, and I had no one to support me there.
Still, I agreed to give up any claim to the baby, if they would simply commit to the surgery that would save his life.
But after months in court, they continued to refuse this common-sense agreement. So, putting my job on hold, I moved my two children to Texas and delivered where I knew the baby boy would have the best odds at survival and my kids and me would have support. He came into this world on Aug. 12, and I'm told he received his first surgery.
Hardly 'political theater'
People have called this political theater. It isn't. This is about giving an innocent child a shot at the life he deserves. I'm eternally grateful that the Texas family court and Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton ordered that the baby boy I carried must receive the necessary surgery.
Yet this matter still isn't settled. The contracting couple is actively working to get the court order that required the baby's continued treatment thrown out.
It is unthinkable to me to give birth to a precious, living, breathing baby boy and yet deny him the chance to survive.
I'm not fighting to try to take someone else's baby. I'm fighting because this baby boy needs someone willing to advocate for and fight alongside him as he gets the ongoing treatment his fragile heart requires. And it turns out that someone is me. With the legal assistance of Alliance Defending Freedom, I have asked for only one thing from the very beginning: A commitment that this baby will be provided the life-saving treatment he needs. That is all it would take to end this.
I haven't been allowed to hold this precious baby boy I carried and protected throughout my pregnancy. The only glimpse I got of him was during a very short 60 seconds while his umbilical cord was still connected. As soon as the cord was cut, he was taken away.
You may know the story of King Solomon. Two women stood before him, claiming to be the mother of a child. But only one was committed to giving the child life. Today, that same story is playing out in US courts. Two sides are in a dispute, but only one of us is committing to lifesaving care. My plea, my only goal, is simple: Let's commit to giving this baby the full treatment he needs to live.
KEEP ON TOPIC
No personal insults
No death wishes of any individual
Trolling, taunting, spamming, and off topic comments may be removed at the discretion of group mods. NT members that vote up their own comments, repeat comments, or continue to disrupt the conversation risk having all of their comments deleted. Please remember to quote the person(s) to whom you are replying to preserve continuity of this seed. Any use of the term white supremacist or Christian Nationalist will be deleted.
Article is LOCKED by author/seeder
Tags
Who is online
86 visitors
A lot of issues in this situation.
Because it is. This extremely rare, isolated situation is being used as fodder to claim other women shouldn't have a choice over their own bodies as this woman CLEARLY DID HAVE THE CHOICE THE ENTIRE FUCKING TIME but they don't mention that in the article. They don't mention that the surrogate family has no legal right to force an abortion and never did so this isn't a fucking legal problem anyone needs to worry about. So yes, this is horseshit political theatre.
I agree. I've read a few other articles about this and there are actually people who are siding with the couple in California.
This is a stretch (to put it mildly) but there could be be a legal issue from a genetics perspective. To the best of my knowledge, it's really "uncharted territory" from this aspect.
Her body her choice. Same as it always should be. Her choice...
If she wants to keep baby and pay all bills she should be able to do that