August 7, 2026
America is facing a story straight out of 1 Kings: one baby, two parties wanting the baby, and only one of those parties wanting the baby alive. And while this case is not before King Solomon in the Bible, who wanted to determine which of two fighting women was the true mother, judges in the Alaska Superior Court and the California Second District Court of Appeal are hearing arguments for why a baby with a Sept. 3 due date should be protected and live or be sentenced to die by abortion.
A surrogate mother from Alaska is attempting to save her preborn baby’s life as the contractual parents push for a late-term abortion because of a prenatal heart diagnosis and are threatening the mother with a massive lawsuit.
McKenna West, an Alaskan nurse and single mom of two, agreed to be a surrogate for a couple in September 2025 to make a little extra money, according to media reports. An anatomy scan in April 2026, when she was five months pregnant (20 weeks) revealed that the child, “Baby Gabriel,” may have hypoplastic left heart syndrome (HLHS). To note, most babies can live outside the womb starting about 22 weeks.
While prenatal diagnoses are often wrong and the condition is treatable, the contractual parents, only referred to as N.G. and A.O. in court documents, demanded an abortion on a child poised to be able to live outside the womb.
West said no.
“Every life matters. No woman should be forced to end the life of the baby she is carrying — including me… Baby Gabriel should receive a chance at life,” West told The New York Post.
Baby Gabriel’s contractual parents disagree. Now, they are demanding that the courts enforce the ‘abortion on demand’ clause of the surrogacy agreement.
What a cold-hearted clause to include in a contract for a baby.
The surrogate mother offered to take full financial and parental responsibility for Baby Gabriel to save his life. “She was appalled at the idea that doctors would inject Baby Gabriel with ‘a solution that will stop his heart and then he’ll be literally ripped apart and dismembered as he’s taken from [her] uterus,’ when his condition is treatable,” according to reports on the suit.
The contractual parents denied her request and any compromise she offered to save Baby Gabriel’s life, including giving up all rights to the baby under the condition he gets the surgery he needs.
Instead, the contractual parents opted to sue West for $250,000, which would bankrupt the young mother. Despite suing her for this large sum and West offering to take on all the financial burden of Baby Gabriel’s care to save his life, they are accusing West of only being after their money.
Fleeing to Texas for her and the baby’s safety, she is now tied up in a legal battle in California, where the contractual parents are attempting to compel West to give birth.
“However, West suspects that this is a ploy by the [contractual] parents to terminate Baby Gabriel by refusing to have doctors perform the life-saving surgery on him,” reports the New York Post.
This is one of many cases of forced abortion on surrogate mothers taking over the news cycle. In Canada, a same-sex couple is suing their surrogate for refusing to abort a baby because of a minor birth defect and cleft lip.
While pro-abortion feminists in Handmaid’s Tale costumes compare the story to modern pro-life laws, they miss the obvious comparison of couples using women for their own ends with surrogacy, giving them no choice over what happens to the Life in her womb.
Students for Life of America holds that all life is inherently valuable and worthy of protection and respect. Surrogacy inherently violates these values, treating women like machines and babies like products. The natural result is the dehumanization of both the child and mother. Both deserve better.
Learn more about the realities and inaccuracies of prenatal diagnoses HERE.
READ MORE STORIES LIKE THIS FROM SFLA AS WE DEFEND THE SANCTITY OF ALL LIFE:
Here’s What You Need to Know About Any Prenatal Diagnosis
HORRIFYING: YouTuber Jesse Ridgway Aborted His Baby for Having Down Syndrome