Dallas – The legal showdown over a surrogacy contract is now before District Judge Ashley Wysocki, and the outcome could reverberate throughout Texas’s booming surrogacy industry. The case involves McKenna West, an Alaska‑born surrogate who traveled to Texas to give birth for a California couple after doctors diagnosed the unborn child with hypoplastic left heart syndrome, a severe congenital heart condition.
Under the original agreement, the intended parents were permitted to terminate the pregnancy if the unborn child’s health was compromised. West refused to comply and brought the baby, named Rumi, to Texas in July. After delivering the child in mid‑August, the infant underwent his first life‑saving heart surgery on August 17. At a recent Dallas County hearing, Judge Wysocki temporarily extended an order that bars West from making medical decisions for Rumi while the case proceeds.
Why Texas became a surrogacy destination
Over the past decade, Texas has emerged as one of the nation’s top surrogacy destinations. State health data show more than 650 surrogate births in 2025, more than double the numbers a decade earlier. A 2022 analysis of CDC data revealed about 700 embryonic transfers for gestational surrogacy in Texas clinics—second only to California’s 3,600.
Experts attribute Texas’s popularity to a clear statutory framework established in 2003, experienced medical providers, and a seasoned pool of surrogates. “The state has proper safeguards for both the surrogate and the intended parents rather than fear‑based safeguards,” said Parham Zar, founder of the Egg Donor & Surrogacy Institute, which has facilitated roughly 2,000 surrogacies nationwide.
Legal certainty versus contractual uncertainty
Texas law grants pre‑birth parentage recognition to married couples, offering greater certainty than many states that only issue post‑birth orders. However, the West case highlights gaps that still exist, especially for same‑sex couples or single intended parents, who may face additional hurdles.
Legal scholars note that the enforceability of contract clauses allowing termination of a pregnancy is now in question. The 2022 Texas abortion ban removed the ability for contracts to include such clauses, prompting some attorneys to advise clients to look elsewhere for surrogacy services.
“Future parties will want to avoid courts striking down parts of their agreements on public‑policy grounds,” said Rachel Rebouché, a reproductive‑law professor at UT Austin School of Law. If the court rules that the termination clause is unenforceable, it could prompt a wave of contract revisions across the industry.
Potential political fallout
Dallas‑area attorney Jenny Womack, who has handled surrogacy cases for 25 years, warned that Texas Republicans may seize the case as a catalyst to restrict surrogacy. While she believes the dispute alone won’t overturn the state’s pro‑surrogacy stance, it could feed into a broader GOP push to tighten reproductive‑related contracts.
“There’s a lot of uncertainty right now because we don’t know what the next legislature will do,” Womack said.
The case also underscores the financial stakes involved. The intended parents have countersued West for $100,000, alleging breach of contract, while West seeks a claim to parentage—a claim many legal observers deem unlikely to succeed without extensive litigation.
As the litigation unfolds in multiple states, intended parents and surrogates alike are watching closely. The outcome will shape not only Texas’s reputation as a surrogacy‑friendly state but also the legal safeguards that protect families seeking to build children through assisted reproduction.
Original reporting: Texarkana Gazette — read the source article.
