It is tragic when the story of a child with a prenatal diagnosis is exploited in an effort to promote the intentional killing of other children.
As reported by the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, Megan Kling and her husband Sam had two daughters and were expecting their first son. But at 21 weeks and five days, an ultrasound revealed that there might be a health concern with their preborn baby boy. There appeared to be a lack of amniotic fluid — a sign of a serious, life-threatening condition for the baby. The doctor, Dr. Kaitlyn Cunningham, knew that it was likely bilateral renal agenesis — also called Potter syndrome — and sent the couple for a more specialized ultrasound at Gundersen Lutheran Medical Center, where the condition was confirmed.
But this story from the Journal Sentinel isn’t actually telling the whole story.
Potter syndrome and survival
Potter syndrome is a condition in which the kidneys do not form, preventing the preborn child from urinating. This causes a low amount of amniotic fluid. The lack of amniotic fluid leads to underdeveloped lungs and other concerns in the preborn child. Without kidneys or fully functioning lungs, children with the condition are likely to die at birth.
Though the Milwaukee Journal Sentinal reported that Potter syndrome carries a 100% mortality rate, there actually are survivors.
Abigail Beutler, the daughter of former Congresswoman Jaime Herrera Beutler and her husband, has lived nearly 12 years since receiving a prenatal diagnosis of Potter syndrome. Abigail was given a chance to survive through experimental amnioinfusion, which involves injecting fluid into the amniotic sac — improving lung development and potentially increasing the survival rate.
Herrera Beutler went into premature labor at just 28 weeks in July 2013; amnioinfusion carries this risk. Abigail was put on dialysis due to her lack of kidneys; once she was strong enough, she received a donated kidney from her father. She is now 11 years old and is reportedly doing well.
Another little girl, Katalina, was diagnosed with Potter syndrome when her mother Esther Quiralte was 21 weeks pregnant. Her doctor told her there was nothing that could be done and that abortion was the “best option.” After conducting her own research, Quiralte found Dr. Michael Barsoom at CHI Health, who agreed to help her. She began traveling from California to Omaha, Nebraska, for amnioinfusions — even temporarily relocating to Omaha with her husband and three-year-old daughter to have 15 infusions before going back to California to give birth. Katalina was born and underwent dialysis while awaiting a kidney; though she had a long journey ahead of her, she was alive.
Don’t listen to all of these doctors telling you ‘no,’ because there will be one telling you ‘yes,’ ” she said. Katalina is reportedly “happy” and “normal.”
Dr. Barsoom is the family’s hero, but according to him, “The real hero in her life is her mother because she had to endure all the travel. And even if she didn’t have to travel, she had to endure having the procedure once a month. And if it wasn’t for her mother’s resolve, she wouldn’t be here.”
View this post on Instagram
A 2023 study published in JAMA revealed that in a study on amnioinfusion, 82% of infants who survived to birth lived for at least 14 days after birth or longer and were placed on dialysis. The study found, “Restoring amniotic fluid via serial amnioinfusions may promote lung development, enabling survival.” Out of 21 participants, there were 17 live births with a median gestational age of 32 weeks, four days at delivery. All of the babies were delivered prior to 37 weeks. Fourteen (82%) of those 17 infants survived for at least 14 days and six survived to hospital discharge while undergoing dialysis.
“Serial amnioinfusions mitigated lethal pulmonary hypoplasia but were associated with preterm delivery. The lower rate of survival to discharge highlights the additional mortality burden independent of lung function. Additional long-term data are needed to fully characterize the outcomes in surviving neonates and assess the morbidity and mortality burden,” the researchers reported.
In short, there is hope.
The Kling Family
The Kling family’s story is being marketed as a “difficult decision.” But when it comes to the lives of our children, killing them should never be an option in the decision-making process when faced with health challenges. An abortion in these cases can actually have a negative mental health effect on parents.
When the specialized ultrasound confirmed the diagnosis, they were also told that the baby did not have a bladder and also had abnormalities in his brain and heart. Kling was given a choice to make. Ultimately, she and her husband chose to induce early and refuse any medical intervention for their son, whom they named Nolan. But they couldn’t intentionally end his life in Wisconsin, where babies are protected from abortion after 20 weeks unless there is a threat to the mother’s life or health.
The closest location for Kling to have an induced abortion — a procedure which always carries the intent to kill the baby — was the Mayo Clinic in Minnesota, where they would allow Kling to have an induced labor abortion (a non-emergent induced abortion in which a child is delivered prematurely with the intent that no medical interventions will be provided to him or her, hastening death).
Her other choices for an abortion in Minnesota were Planned Parenthood facilities in the Twin Cities or Gundersen Winona Campus. She and her husband ruled those facilities out because she would have to be sedated and her baby would be “removed from her uterus.” In this D&E procedure, the baby is dismembered. Kling decided against this.
Kling was given just days to make the “difficult decision” of whether to carry to term or have her son’s life intentionally ended. To make this choice, she considered that it was difficult for the baby to move with little amniotic fluid, which also left no cushion around him. The pressure from her body could cause skeletal defects and she sometimes worried she was hurting him with her movements. These are all understandable concerns that any mother would have, but this begs the question — did Cunningham, or any doctor, inform the couple of amnioinfusion, which is offered at several hospitals in the U.S., including the Cleveland Clinic?
In fact, the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota — the same hospital that committed Kling’s abortion — is actually currently carrying out a study on amnioinfusion; it began in 2018 and is set to conclude this December.
A mere two weeks after receiving the diagnosis, Kling and her husband went to Mayo for an induced labor abortion; in Minnesota, abortion is legal up to 24 weeks.
“The alternative was a nightmare to imagine: carrying a baby that was 100% fatal to term,” Kling said. “I mean, it’s pure torture to imagine. I don’t know how a mother could do that. I’ve got a strong career. I’m married with two children I still needed to care for. I couldn’t put myself through that knowing my baby was going to die.”
It’s emotionally, physically, and mentally difficult, but countless mothers have done just that — spending as much time with their children as possible before birth since their time would likely be short after birth. But did any doctor at the Mayo Clinic inform Kling that at the same facility, doctors were working to try to save babies with Potter syndrome? Did anyone give her the option of amnioinfusion?
Mayo induced Kling at 23 weeks and two days. Nolan was born alive and the couple was “able to hold him for about an hour until he passed away…”
But Kling was angry that she couldn’t have Nolan killed in her own home state. Referring to Nolan as “that baby,” she said, “It was very traumatic. I was honestly very angry that the only option in the state of Wisconsin for me was to carry that baby to term. I still want to have a third healthy child someday, and it was infuriating to be in that doctor’s office and have the doctors not be able to help me due to politics.”
Whether she had delivered at 23 weeks or 40 weeks, losing a child is traumatic. Still, she argued that abortion should have been accessible to her in her home state because it was a matter of “maternal health” and the abortion was “necessary care” for her.
But this language is misleading at best.
Was her life or health at risk?
Cunningham, Kling’s doctor, told the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, “Megan made a decision to have a life-saving termination of her pregnancy. Her pregnancy was not viable. Every time a woman gets pregnant, they are risking their lives. That might sound dramatic, but you never know who will develop pre-eclampsia or some other life-threatening condition. For a mother to continue with a pregnancy that is not viable is only a risk to her.”
If you read her remarks carefully, it is easy to see how Cunningham is moving goal posts, calling Kling’s abortion “life-saving” simply because Kling was pregnant.
This is an example of how pro-abortion extremists aim to push legalized abortion through all 40 weeks of pregnancy for any reason — if pregnancy is ‘always life-threatening’ as Cunningham essentially claims, then abortion can take place under the banner of protecting the life or health of the mother at any time, even when her life and health are not truly at risk.
In fact, this is the exact view held by recently retired late-term abortionist Warren Hern (who is estimated to have aborted 42,000 preborn human beings). Hern told interviewer Michael Shermer that pregnancy itself is “a potentially fatal illness, condition that can kill [a woman].” When the confused interviewer attempted to get clarification, Hern snapped, “The medical problem is that [the woman’s] pregnant!” Hern considers pregnancy a disease, and has authored papers referring to humans as a “planetary cancer.”
But extreme views of abortion advocates aside, neither Kling’s health nor her life were any more at risk than any woman experiencing a pregnancy without a fetal diagnosis — otherwise, Cunningham would not have sent Kling out of state for the abortion.
Is abortion safer than childbirth?
The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel claimed that the “risk of death associated with childbirth is approximately 14 times higher than that with abortion.” It’s an attempt to claim that Kling’s decision was a way to protect her own health, but it’s information based on a single flawed study published in 2012 by two pro-abortion researchers.
Dr. John Ferrer pointed out in his article for the Equal Rights Institute that no other study has ever been able to confirm this finding, making the 2012 study highly unreliable.
“It’s a pretty radical claim to say that abortion is 14 times safer than childbirth,” Ferrer said. “It’s so radical, there’s only one source that claims they can prove it. It’s a journal article from abortion-choice researchers Elizabeth Raymond and David Grimes (hereafter, ‘RG study’).” Ferrer notes that Grimes is “one of the biggest names in the pro-choice lobby.”
He explained, “There is a reason, however, why no other study claims to demonstrate … this ’14 times safer’ claim. “They can’t reproduce the results, so no other study has been able to corroborate that enormous claim. The RG study might be the most famous, and most widely cited paper on the subject, but despite its popularity, it’s pretty much useless.”
The Kling story is tragic and heartbreaking, but pro-abortion doctors and media are exploiting Nolan’s life and Kling’s pain to promote the pro-abortion agenda of widespread abortion access and laws that allow abortion for any reason, at any time.
Kling had options other than aborting her child, but she chose abortion on the advice of her doctor. It’s hard to imagine that while Mayo Clinic staff were helping to save preborn children with Potter’s syndrome in one part of the hospital, doctors in another were ending Nolan’s life prematurely.
