McKenna West’s Case and the Limits of “Her Body, Her Choice.”
By now you’ve probably heard about the baby Gabriel/Rumi controversy. To recap, McKenna West was a surrogate mother for a genetically unrelated couple. At the 20-week scan, doctors prenatally diagnosed their son (whom they have named Rumi but West calls Gabriel) with hypoplastic left heart syndrome, a condition that requires significant surgeries. His parents directed West to have a late abortion. She refused, sought assistance from Live Action, and fled to Texas. Last week, the baby boy was born. He is receiving appropriate cardiac healthcare pursuant to a court order.
This case posed an interesting dilemma for abortion supporters. Would they stand by their “her body, her choice” rhetoric and affirm West’s right to refuse the abortion?
In fairness, some did. When you encounter those folks, you can have a good-faith discussion using the bodily rights section of our abortion debate index.
Others… not so much:
“It’s not about who’s carrying” and “fulfill the role of a normal person” – I could hardly ask for a clearer example that this has nothing to do with bodily rights and everything to do with who should be permitted to live.
Comments like these explain why major pro-choice organizations remain silent on this story: they can’t afford to alienate a large portion of their base. Many people who label themselves “pro-choice” are not operating from the party-line bodily autonomy position. Their support for abortion instead comes from a core belief that embryos and fetuses (especially potentially disabled ones) are less than human, less than children, and not worth protecting.
Sources: Comments on CNN post, Dallas Express post, FOX 26 Houston post, second Dallas Express post, and Dallas Morning News post
If you appreciate our work and would like to help, one of the most effective ways to do so is to become a monthly donor. You can also give a one-time donation here or volunteer with us here.
