In a tragic and complex family saga, Scott Naso has opened up about the turmoil he faced while caring for his wife, Sherry, who tragically passed away from cancer in 2024. The family discord intensified following the arrival of their daughter, Laila, in July 2021, which coincided with the recurrence of Sherry’s illness. What began as a harmonious relationship with Sherry’s parents, Jila Khorsand and Siavesh Ghoreishi, shifted dramatically as Scott grew increasingly concerned about their influence over his wife’s health and their grandchild.
:max_bytes(150000):strip_icc():format(jpeg)/dr-siavash-ghoreishi-dr-jila-khorsand-scott-naso-grandparents-rights-trial-051926-54d4d99261234342b06fa038a8c5c490.jpg)
Scott, a 40-year-old narcotics detective, reflected on how he initially believed his in-laws when they claimed Sherry’s alarming symptoms were merely the result of withdrawing from Prozac after her past battle with breast cancer. “They were very convincing, and I believed them,” he recounted, recalling how he gradually became more sceptical about their assertions as Sherry’s health declined. During early 2024, she exhibited disturbing physical ailments. It was during this time that Scott decided to seek outside medical advice, ultimately leading to a devastating discovery: Sherry had developed a brain tumour that had metastasised.
After undergoing surgery on April 13, 2024, Sherry never regained consciousness and subsequently passed away just 11 days later. Scott’s grief was compounded by suspicions regarding the medical care Sherry received from her parents. These concerns escalated into a formal complaint to Rhode Island health authorities, where he accused Khorsand and Ghoreishi of neglectful medical practices and an overall detrimental influence on Sherry.
The situation, already strained, became more chaotic in the immediate aftermath of Sherry’s death. Scott claimed that on the very day Sherry passed away, he found his daughter Laila in distress, as his in-laws allegedly administered medication without his consent. He accused Ghoreishi, Laila’s paediatrician, and Khorsand of behaving insensitively in a time of profound grief, further eroding the fragile bond that existed between them. Although Ghoreishi claimed he believed Laila was suffering from croup needing treatment, Scott firmly maintained that permission was never given for such actions.
As time progressed, Scott began conducting his own investigation into his in-laws’ medical practices. He discovered that Ghoreishi prescribed more than 100 medications to Sherry and over 36 for Laila, raising serious ethical questions about the appropriateness of treating family members. While state regulations advise against such practices, they do not constitute illegal behaviour.
Following extensive legal proceedings, Scott found himself embroiled in a bitter court dispute with Sherry’s parents over their desire for visitation rights with Laila. Initially granted supervised contact, this arrangement faced difficulties, culminating in a contentious family court hearing. Accusations of emotional manipulation were exchanged between both parties, complicating an already painful situation.
Ultimately, on April 29, 2025, Judge Felix Gill ruled against Khorsand and Ghoreishi’s petition for visitation rights. While he supported Scott’s position as a fit custodian for Laila, the judge did not shy away from criticising Scott, asserting that his actions seemed self-serving and questioning whether he had the best interests of his daughter in mind.
Facing substantial legal costs, estimated at over £400,000, Scott now finds himself contemplating a constitutional challenge to the grandparents’ rights laws in Rhode Island. “I’m in search of something simple: justice,” he declared in a recent interview. Scott’s journey has become one of navigating the complexities of family relationships while seeking accountability for what he perceives as negligence concerning Sherry’s care.
As Scott continues to protect Laila’s interests amidst this heart-wrenching family dispute, his story serves as a poignant reminder of the often unseen struggles that can arise within families, particularly during times of illness and loss. The conflict illustrates the delicate balance between familial love and the necessity of safeguards when intervening in health-related matters, a balance that can become tragically distorted.