Surrogate who refused to abort baby at parents' request says infant was snatched from her as soon as umbilical cord was cut

A surrogate who refused to abort a baby at the request of his biological parents says the infant was snatched from her as soon as his umbilical cord was cut.Alaska nurse McKenna West, 28, is in the midst of a legal battle with California couple Nausheen Gilkar and Omar Ahmed after she refused to abort their child, who was diagnosed with a congenital heart defect while in utero.West defied their abortion request, relocated to Texas and gave birth to the child on August 12 at a hospital equipped to perform the surgeries needed to treat his heart condition.The nurse, in an op-ed she penned for the New York Post, has now revealed that the last time she saw the infant was immediately after his birth.'I haven't been allowed to hold this precious baby boy I carried and protected throughout my pregnancy,' she wrote.'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.'Gilkar and Ahmed have sued West over what they describe as her 'malicious, outrageous conduct.' The couple are seeking over $100,000 in damages for her alleged breach of contract.West, however, has now claimed that 'no threat or amount of money could sway my conviction that this baby had a real chance at a full life.' Surrogate mother McKenna West, 28, has claimed that the baby she gave birth to on August 12 was snatched from her as soon as his umbilical cord was cutWhen West agreed to carry the baby she signed a contract that had a clause specifying that she would have to abort the baby in the event of an 'anomaly.' At her 20-week ultrasound scan, West learned that the then-unborn infant had hypoplastic left heart syndrome - a condition that without medical treatment is typically fatal within the first days or weeks of life.The parents - who paid West $60,000 to carry their child - told her she would have to terminate the pregnancy.West, citing her background as a cardiac nurse, claimed in her op-ed that she knew the infant's heart could be repaired if he underwent a series of surgeries shortly after birth.She claims the couple refused and 'ordered me to terminate the pregnancy.'But she says she 'could not participate in killing him' and wanted the biological parents to 'commit to giving this baby lifesaving treatment.'She claimed they refused, so she defied their abortion order and the couple allegedly stopped paying for her medical care. West says she paid for the remainder of the pregnancy herself and, after extensive research, found a hospital in Texas that had a '100% survival rate' for the procedure that the child would need.She said she was told that the infant received his first surgery sometime after his birth eight days ago. West is in the midst of a legal battle with California couple Nausheen Gilkar and Omar Ahmed after she refused to abort their child, who was diagnosed with a congenital heart defect while in uteroBut West also alleged the infant's biological parents are seeking a court order that would require the rest of the treatment to be thrown out.She claimed she is not fighting to 'try to take someone else's baby,' but instead advocating for a child to get the 'ongoing treatment his fragile heart requires.'She went on to compare the case to the Bible story of King Solomon, which sees two women fighting over the same surviving baby.King Solomon suggested they cut the infant in half, prompting the real mother to surrender the baby to save its 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,' West wrote. 'My plea, my only goal, is simple: Let's commit to giving this baby the full treatment he needs to live.'West secured a legal victory in her case on August 11, after having petitioned a family district court in Dallas to allow the child to receive the potentially life-saving care.West was supported in her efforts by Texas Attorney General and Senate candidate Ken Paxton, who submitted a brief arguing that state law requires that physicians provide medically necessary treatment.Less than 24 hours later, an associate judge issued a temporary restraining order preventing anyone from withholding or obstructing the infant's necessary treatment. West claims she is not fighting to 'try to take someone else's baby,' but instead advocating for a child to get the 'ongoing treatment his fragile heart requires'The judge also appointed a legal guardian to ensure the child receives all of the necessary treatments for his condition.The legal win did come with one major drawback for West, who is now forbidden from having any contact with the baby after his birth.The infant is currently in Gilkar and Ahmed's custody, TMZ reported. They have reportedly named the boy Rumi and say they are working with medical professionals to ensure he receives the care he needs. Gilkar and Ahmed claim that West is no stranger to pregnancies and knew that complications could arise, their lawsuit said.They have denied threatening the surrogate to try to force her to go through with the abortion and said they have suffered emotional distress as a result of her actions. The couple 'haven't given [West] anything' since she decided to keep the child, Lincoln Wilson, West's attorney, told the New York Post. She is now getting ready to launch her own legal battle against the couple so she can become the child's legal parent, Wilson claimed.