A gay couple in Canada is suing their surrogate for nearly $600,000 after she refused to abort the now 2-year-old child because of potential birth defects. The lawsuit, obtained by the National Post, says that the couple agreed to continue the pregnancy after more tests — ordered by the surrogate — revealed the child was healthy with only a minor birth defect, a cleft lip. The woman was 22-weeks along at the time. Two years later, however, the couple is claiming they were victims of emotional distress because their surrogate failed to properly inform them of the child's health, violating confidentiality and putting the child at risk.
BREAKING: A same-sex couple is suing their surrogate for $600K after she refused to abort their baby at 22 weeks in Canada.
— Lila Rose (@LilaGraceRose) July 15, 2026
Scans indicated the child had a cleft lip and a possible heart defect.
The little boy was born healthy.
That child is alive today not because of the men…
These “dads” are suing their surrogate because she refused to murder their baby, who had a cleft lip. The little boy is now 2 and still in their custody!
— Allie Beth Stuckey (@conservmillen) July 15, 2026
This is the consequence of the unregulated surrogacy system in the U.S. When children are bought and sold, we can’t be… https://t.co/iTGhSrGtw8
Upon initially learning of the potential birth defect following an ultrasound, the couple sent a letter to the surrogate expressing their desire to have the child aborted:
“Considering that medical tests indicate that the fetus has, or is likely to have, a genetic, chromosomal or other abnormality or defect, and in accordance with article 8.5 (a) of our surrogacy agreement … we want to inform you of our wish that the pregnancy be terminated,” the gay couple wrote. “Although very difficult, this decision is free and informed.”
According to the surrogate and the surrogate agency, the abortion demand permanently damaged the relationship between the surrogate and the couple, neither of whom are named in the report. While the couple did end up choosing to proceed with the pregnancy, tensions flared once again over the birth plan. The woman filed a reimbursement claim for the out-of-pocket expenses tied to the pregnancy and home-birth costs. The couple reportedly did not cover the costs because they wanted a hospital birth. She learned her small claim required arbitration before she was hit with the full civil suit over the abortion debacle.
According to the woman, she had matched with dozens of families on the surrogacy site before deciding on the gay couple whom she had gotten along with well before receiving the abortion request letter in June 2024.
Unlike in the U.S. where surrogates charge commercial fees, Canadian surrogates can only be reimbursed for receipted expenses, which many women never receive.
"I just feel used...They didn’t get the perfect child they wanted and they threw me away,” the woman told the Post. "You know I’m a single mom, you know I have a daughter, and you’re basically suing me for my house."
Sally Rhoads-Heinrich, the owner of the surrogacy company, commented on the situation. "What I find most difficult in this is they are suing the woman who brought their son to them,” she said. “How is their son going to feel some day if he learns that?”
Surrogacy often results in intense legal disputes between couples and surrogates, diminishing the child's life to nothing more than a contract. This has even left some children orphaned while their custody is determined. Children born through surrogacy too often become viewed as commodities instead of the precious, new life that they are. The child still remains in the custody of the homosexual couple, who declined to comment on the story.