Single Dad Blames His Wife’s Doctor Parents for Her Death. Now They’re Fighting Over Visitation of His Daughter

When police detective Scott Naso and his wife, Shahrzad “Sherry” Naso, welcomed their daughter in July 2021, they shared the hopes common to many first-time parents and looked forward to building a happy future together.

“I’d never seen her that happy,” Scott recalls. “We were both over the moon.”

Sherry, 37, and Scott, 40, had married the previous year at the home they built in Portsmouth, Rhode Island. Their relationship had already faced serious challenges. In 2017, Sherry was diagnosed with breast cancer and underwent chemotherapy and radiation.

Their daughter, Laila, was later conceived using a donor egg and Scott’s sperm, with the help of a surrogate. The arrangement was supported financially by Sherry’s parents, Siavash Ghoreishi and Jila Khorsand, both physicians.

What followed Laila’s birth later became the focus of a prolonged legal dispute between Scott and his in-laws. The case includes allegations involving medical treatment decisions, claims of possible medical neglect, and accusations related to factitious disorder imposed on another (formerly called Munchausen syndrome by proxy). The proceedings have also revealed deep tensions within the family.

A major turning point came near the end of Sherry’s life.

Sherry’s cancer returned within a few years of Laila’s birth. By April 2024, doctors discovered a tumor in her brain measuring approximately 1.65 inches. She underwent surgery but never regained consciousness and died two weeks later. Laila was just months away from turning three.

On the day of Sherry’s death, Scott says he heard Laila crying and found his in-laws administering prednisone, a steroid medication, using a syringe-like device. Laila’s grandfather later stated he believed the child had croup and that the medication was appropriate. Sherry’s parents have denied any wrongdoing.

Scott maintains that Laila was not sick at the time and says he had not given permission for medication to be given.

Following this incident, Scott says he began examining what he viewed as an unusual medical arrangement within the family. His father-in-law served as Laila’s pediatrician and, according to Scott and his attorney, also provided medical advice and prescriptions to Sherry.

Prescription records later showed that Ghoreishi had written more than 100 prescriptions for Sherry and more than 30 for Laila. While medical ethics generally discourage physicians from treating immediate family members, the practice is not illegal.

However, controlled substance prescribing became a point of legal discussion during court proceedings.

After Sherry’s death, Scott ended contact between Laila and her grandparents. Sherry’s parents subsequently petitioned the court for visitation rights. Rhode Island law allows grandparents to request visitation, but courts must determine whether such contact serves the child’s best interests.

The trial began in late 2024 and has continued into 2025, with testimony from both sides. No criminal charges have been filed.

Scott later filed a complaint with the Rhode Island Department of Health alleging medical negligence and accusing his in-laws of engaging in harmful medical practices. He argues that medical decisions contributed to Sherry’s declining condition. Sherry’s parents strongly deny these claims.

Medical records indicate that earlier doctor visits did not detect the returning cancer. Scott says the diagnosis was only made after seeking additional medical evaluation.

Court testimony has presented conflicting accounts. Scott describes growing concern over Sherry’s symptoms, while Khorsand has expressed worries about Scott’s behavior and emotional state. Both grandparents have testified that they love Laila and believe Scott is a capable father.

Despite the legal conflict, all parties emphasize their care for the child.

Scott says Laila frequently speaks about her mother and cherishes family photographs. He describes the emotional and financial strain caused by the ongoing legal battle, noting the burden of legal expenses and time away from work.

“This is about keeping Laila safe,” Scott says.

The case remains unresolved, and appeals from either side remain possible.