The Fight for Baby Rumi


As humans - we tend to create our own misery.  And if we are lucky and are surrounded by a sturdy support system of family and friends, things can be tidied up and at least made bearable.  I am not quite sure I can handle reading much additional information regarding this situation; except for headlines and quick scans of content.  The story is not only tragic, but it is a Gordian knot.

https://www.dailymail.com/news/article-16143247/Parents-launch-attack-surrogate-refused-request-abort-baby-heart-defect.html

The initial perspective for the story involves a bit of history.  The couple who hired a surrogate are highly educated and motivated. Based on their names, my assumption is they are part of the Ummah.  If so, adoption was never a choice, because it is forbidden in Islam.  Surrogacy provides an acceptable answer.  This couple are most likely lovely people.

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/efuWHotQSgQ

Islam also teaches that "ensoulment" is at four months, when Allah reveals what is in the womb.  After a gestational age of approximately 16-17 weeks, abortion is considered a major sin.  I trained under a Hanafi Mufti, and it is the softest of the four Sunni jurisprudential schools. I appreciated quite a few of my mentor's views.  Hanafi scholarship allows for abortion in the case of fetal anomalies or rape.  

Now if the surrogate mother, McKenna West, is a Christian and has a strong conviction against abortion, I can also take her side in this fight.  I believe that abortion is murder.  And I marched down the street toward the Texas State Capitol Building as a young adult with my homemade little sign - part of a much larger crowd of politically active citizens. I have always opposed abortion in unwavering manner.

But how to untangle the Gordon knot?  If McKenna West was being paid to be a rental incubator, does she have ownership of what is in the womb, or does that ownership belong to the biological parents?  What makes this a bit twitchy,  is that perhaps a maternal instinct took hold which desired survival for the fetus. But those that possessed the DNA map for this fetus desired that Rumi be denied his first breath.

Who is the mother?  King Solomon had to deal with this situation and it was more black and white. There were no shades of grey.  The one who was not the mother was willing for the baby to be killed.  The real mother, was willing to give up the baby if necessary to save its life.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judgement_of_Solomon

So it becomes grey...  dark grey.  Nausheen Gilkar preferred the baby not survive the womb.  McKenna West fled to Texas, so that the baby might have a shot at life. But then, Nausheen Gilkar might have also surprised herself with a maternal instinct!

My belief?  McKenna West did not violate her conviction against abortion.  She gave birth to a little boy who she named Gabriel.   She had an absolute right to bring him to life.  He was sustained in her womb. She has done her job.  

But baby Rumi now belongs to his biological parents. She must relinquish that right.  She chose the thorny path of being a surrogate mother.  It does not matter that the couple initially wished for an abortion.  That baby - is their bloodline.  He belongs to them.

Because they have chosen the name Rumi - let me leave you with a quatrain from one of my favorite poets,  Omar Khayyam.  He authored the Rubaiyat, and I love his poetry.

Destiny's curtain none can penetrate,

Nor learn the hidden mysteries of Fate,

Seventy-two years I've pondered day and night,

Nor solve aught - long the tale were to relate.

My prayers are extended to Omar Ahmed, Nausheen Gilkar, and also McKenna West.  But my hope is that the SCOTUS will give custody of the neonate to the biological parents.  McKenna West must fade into the background.

Here is the update from the Texas bench.  

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/sep/19/texas-california-surrogate-court



Comments

Popular posts from this blog