July 2003

Baby Doe’s Voice Being Heard Around The World
by Mathew D. Staver

The double homicide of Laci and Connor Peterson along with the two guardianship cases in Florida have reignited the debate over the humanity of unborn children. The Miami guardianship case involving a 28-year-old woman known by the initials of Z.H. came on the heels of, and sometimes was confused with, the Orlando case involving J.D.S., in which Gov. Jeb Bush publicly stated that he supported a guardian for the unborn child.

On Friday evening before the Memorial Day weekend, I received a call informing me that Judge Arthur Rothenberg entered an order requiring that Z.H. abort her 24-week-old baby, whom we have referred to as Baby Doe. Over the weekend and through Memorial Day, my staff and I worked feverishly to intervene on behalf of Baby Doe. We learned that a neurologist informed the Judge that he recommended an abortion because Z.H. has a shunt in her head to drain excess fluid and her pregnancy may cause additional fluid retention which could result in headaches. The neurologist also stated that the medications which Z.H. had been taking may have an effect on her unborn child. However, OB-GYNs specializing in high risk pregnancy also informed the Judge that Baby Doe was developing normally and there was no medical reason to perform an abortion. We also learned that the guardian who had been appointed for Z.H. had never consented to the abortion.
Florida law requires that prior to an abortion of a viable child, the guardian appointed for the incapacitated woman must first consent to the abortion, and then at least two physicians must certify that the abortion is medically necessary to preserve the life or health of the woman. Additionally, information must be given to inform the guardian of the gestational age of the child, the risk of the abortion, and alternative medical treatment and services that may be provided as an alternative to abortion. None of these procedures were followed in this case.

On Tuesday morning after Memorial Day weekend, we filed court pleadings requesting that two individuals be appointed as guardians for Baby Doe, and we also requested that the Judge stay his order of abortion. The Judge denied the motion and we immediately appealed to the appellate court. The issue before the appeals court was not the intervention and the appointment of the guardians, but a request to stay the abortion order to allow that matter to be decided later. The court denied that request and we immediately appealed to the Florida Supreme Court at 8:00 that evening.
Wednesday mid-morning we learned that the Florida Supreme Court declined to enter the fray, claiming that it had no jurisdiction to hear the case because the appellate court did not issue a reasoned opinion setting forth its legal position. Shortly thereafter we learned that the abortion was scheduled for Thursday morning and that the procedure would involve a hysterotomy consisting of a lateral incision in the lower abdomen. The procedure in this case was identical to a C-section. The term “C-section” is used when the intent is to deliver a live baby, whereas “hysterotomy” is used when the intent is to deliver a dead baby. By this time we had received inquiries from people all over Florida and America wanting to adopt Baby Doe. Many of these people had already been prescreened by the state of Florida and were ready, willing and able to adopt. We also received inquiries from many adoption agencies. One woman told us that if the child is normal, she can place it in 5 minutes, and if the baby is a special needs child, she could place it in 30 minutes.

This information was presented to the Judge. The Judge spoke to another physician who specialized in obstetrics. This physician advised the Judge that at 24 weeks the child had a 60% chance of survival. In fact, between 23 and 26 weeks, a child develops rapidly. Adding one more week of life in the womb dramatically increases the chance of survival to 75%, according to statistics for unborn children at 25 weeks. Around 9:00 p.m. on Wednesday, we received the good news that the Judge had verbally changed his order and now directed that a live birth through C-section be conducted rather than an abortion. The Thursday morning abortion was canceled. We were overjoyed by this news, but then on Thursday morning we learned that the Judge had again changed his opinion and directed that the abortion be conducted.

The change of opinion was apparently based upon two reasons. After the Judge spoke with the obstetrician and confirmed the survival rate, the doctor who was scheduled to perform the abortion was called and told that the abortion was canceled. The abortion doctor became upset and then contacted the Judge late Wednesday night and erroneously informed the Judge that the child would have only a 10% chance of survival at 24 weeks. A search of the medical literature on the internet does not support this contention. In addition to this erroneous statement, the mother of Z.H. protested a C-section. The mother was not the legal guardian of Z.H. and, in fact, had lived in the state of Maryland for the past several years.

Although the 7:30 a.m. abortion had been canceled, following the Judge’s change of mind again the abortion was rescheduled for sometime late Thursday. The Friday morning Miami-Herald newspaper reported that Thursday evening Baby Doe had been aborted. We received telephone calls from many people around the country on that Friday inquiring about the status of Baby Doe. When they learned that Baby Doe had been aborted, many of these people began sobbing.

The Baby Doe story was carried by many national and international media. The tragedy of Baby Doe speaks to the tragedy of abortion. It makes no sense to abort Baby Doe through a hysterotomy method when a C-section could afford Baby Doe a chance at life. From the mother’s perspective there was no difference in this case between a C-section and the planned hysterotomy. However, from the perspective of Baby Doe, the difference was life or death.

The two issues that really underscore the agenda of the abortion proponents include their opposition to informed consent laws and their insistence on the right to abort children in the late second and third trimesters. Informed consent laws are designed to ensure that women understand the risks of and the alternatives to abortion. Any person of common sense would be in favor of such laws. Yet, groups like the National Organization for Women and Planned Parenthood strenuously resist informing women about abortion and its alternatives.

Late term abortion also starkly reveals the tragedy of America’s death culture. When a child is in the late second or third trimester, there are only a few methods of abortion. These methods fall into one of two categories. The abortion is either done through an abdominal hysterotomy, which is similar to a C-section, or through some full or partial induction of labor. The latter includes the infamous partial birth abortion, where the baby is born breach except for the head, and while it’s in such a state, the baby is then killed and the head is removed from the uterus. Other methods include partial dilation, wherein forceps are inserted into the uterus and the baby is dismembered limb by limb. Another method is injecting either a saline solution into the uterus or injecting the baby with some other poisonous drug in order to kill the baby, or clamping the umbilical cord in order to “suffocate” the baby, and then birthing the baby through a full labor procedure. No matter what late term abortion method is performed, no one can argue that these methods are “safer” for the mother than birthing a live baby. If the baby is born through a C-section or some induced labor procedure, then the mother has essentially come to the point of live birth, and instead of life has chosen death.

Although the voice of Baby Doe may be gone, Baby Doe’s voice is being heard around the world. The plight of Baby Doe, along with the Orlando guardianship case and the Laci and Connor Peterson murders, has placed the issue of the rights of the unborn child front and center. Even Newsweek has recently issued a report regarding the advances in fetal technology which have caused many people to rethink their position on abortion. Indeed, the now-famous photographs of the unborn child sticking its tiny hand through the incision in its mother’s uterus and grasping the surgeon’s finger caught the attention of many people around the world. That little boy is named Samuel Armas, whom Newsweek describes as a “chattering, brown-eyed 3½-year-old.” The surgery on Samuel was performed at 21 weeks gestation. Dr. Joseph Bruner of Vanderbilt University performed the surgery. Fifteen weeks after the surgery, his parents said that Samuel “came out screaming.” When referring to the photograph, they exclaimed, “That wasn’t our fetus, that was Samuel.”

Dr. Bruner said that operating on these tiny patients has had a profound effect on his professional and personal life. The Newsweek article quotes him as saying, “We would open the uterus and everything in the O.R. would stop. Everyone was just standing there looking.” Dr. Bruner states that he feels a deep and personal connection with the unborn child. He said, “I’m the first human being that will ever touch them,” and he noted that “I speak to every one.”

Baby Doe has had a profound impact on my life and the lives of many others. Every citizen, indeed every Christian, has a duty to become a voice for the voiceless and defend those who cannot defend themselves. We must reverse the culture of death in America. The land of the free and the home of the brave must once again protect all human life, especially our most vulnerable – unborn children.