ADVERTISEMENT

Her baby has a deadly diagnosis. Her Florida doctors refused an abortion.

cigaretteman

HB King
May 29, 2001
78,091
59,862
113
Deborah Dorbert is devoting the final days before her baby’s birth to planning the details of the infant’s death.
She and her husband will swaddle the newborn in a warm blanket, show their love and weep hello even as they say goodbye. They have decided to have the fragile body cremated and are looking into ways of memorializing their second-born child.
“We want something permanent,” Deborah said. Perhaps a glass figurine infused with ashes. Or an ornament bearing the imprint of a tiny finger. “Not an urn,” she said, cracking one of the rare smiles that break through her relentless tears. “We have a 4-year-old. Things happen.”
Nobody expected things to happen the way they did when halfway through their planned and seemingly healthy pregnancy, a routine ultrasound revealed the fetus had devastating abnormalities, pitching the dazed couple into the uncharted landscape of Florida’s new abortion law.
Deborah and Lee Dorbert say the most painful decision of their lives was not honored by the physicians they trust. Even though medical experts expect their baby to survive only 20 minutes to a couple of hours, the Dorberts say their doctors told them that because of the new legislation, they could not terminate the pregnancy.
“That’s what we wanted,” Deborah said. “The doctors already told me, no matter what, at 24 weeks or full term, the outcome for the baby is going to be the same.”
Florida’s H.B. 5 — Reducing Fetal and Infant Mortality — went into effect last July, soon after the U.S. Supreme Court overturned a half-century constitutional right to abortion.
The new law bans abortion after 15 weeks with a couple of exceptions, including one that permits a later termination if “two physicians certify in writing that, in reasonable medical judgment, the fetus has a fatal fetal abnormality” and has not reached viability.
It is not clear how the Dorberts’ doctors applied the law in this situation. Their baby has a condition long considered lethal that is now the subject of clinical trials to assess a potential treatment.
Neither Dorbert’s obstetrician nor the maternal fetal medicine specialist she consulted responded to multiple requests for comment.
A spokesman for Lakeland Regional Health, the hospital system the doctors are affiliated with, declined to discuss Dorbert’s case or how it is interpreting the new law. In an emailed statement, Tim Boynton, the spokesman, said, “Lakeland Regional Health complies with all laws in the state of Florida.”
The combination of a narrow exception to the law and harsh penalties for violating it terrifies physicians, according to Autumn Katz, interim director of litigation at the Center for Reproductive Rights, who has been tracking the implementation of abortion bans across the country.
Florida physicians who violate the new law face penalties including the possibility of losing their licenses, steep fines and up to five years in prison. As a result, Katz said, they “are likely to err on the side of questioning whether the conditions are fully met.”
Deborah Dorbert, right, and her husband, Lee, have dinner with their son, Kaiden, at their home in Lakeland, Fla. (Thomas Simonetti for The Washington Post)
The Dorberts’ hopes of having a second child came closer to reality last August when Deborah, 33, discovered she was pregnant.
“Everything was great,” Deborah said, recalling how she exercised regularly, ate well and watched in excitement as her pregnancy blossomed. A scan at 11 weeks, 6 days shows a recumbent fetus, buoyed in her womb.
At a mid-November appointment with her obstetrician, Deborah listened to the whoosh whoosh of her baby’s heartbeat and scheduled her next ultrasound for the following week — the anatomy scan that checks the development of fetal organs.
The day before Thanksgiving, Deborah drove with her son to the strip of medical offices across from the hospital where Kaiden had been born four years earlier and parked outside the low-slung, ocher Women’s Care building.
She was ready to introduce Kaiden to his younger sibling.
Deborah pulled up her T-shirt and folded down her yoga pants, baring her skin for a daub of warm gel. The technician slid her wand across Deborah’s swelling abdomen, calling out the baby’s features so that Kaiden could follow along on the black-and-white screen: There’s the baby’s head. There are the hands.
Then her expression changed. The technician excused herself and left the room. When she returned with the obstetrician, Deborah braced herself.
More pictures. More worried frowns. And then a wrenching explanation.
The baby was no longer buoyed in ample amniotic fluid, Deborah’s doctor gently told her. The kidneys were not developing properly, failing to produce the liquid that protects the fetus and promotes the development of vital organs. She didn’t think the baby would survive without a transplant, and she urged Deborah to follow up quickly with a specialist in maternal fetal medicine.
Deborah left carrying the scan stamped with the fetus’s gestational age — 23 weeks, 0 days. The ultrasound report lists a range of abnormalities, not only of the kidneys but also of the heart and stomach consistent with the diagnosis of “oligohydramnios,” or lack of amniotic fluid.
Deborah called Lee away from his new job as an noninjury adjuster for an insurance agency and met him at a park by one of the many lakes that dot Polk County. They cried and walked and wondered whether there could be some simple explanation. Perhaps Deborah’s water had broken prematurely.
Deborah was admitted later that day to Lakeland Regional Hospital for tests, including another ultrasound that showed the fetus had no kidneys.
How Florida’s abortion ban is leaving one family in agony
4:53
Despite their baby’s fatal fetal abnormality, the Dorbert family was denied the possibility of terminating their pregnancy early. (Video: Drea Cornejo/The Washington Post)
On the Wednesday after Thanksgiving, Deborah had an appointment with a maternal fetal medicine specialist. A third ultrasound, now at 24 weeks gestation, confirmed the earlier findings, Deborah said, and the specialist told them that the condition was incompatible with life. This doctor also gave the diagnosis its common name: Potter syndrome.
He told them that some parents choose to continue to full term; others terminate the pregnancy through surgery or by inducing preterm labor, she recalled. He said he would begin contacting health-system administrators about the new law, and stepped out of the room to give the couple privacy to mull over their options.
Before they left, Deborah and Lee decided they would like to terminate the pregnancy as soon as they could. She recalls the doctor saying the termination, which would be performed by her obstetrician, might be possible between 28 and 32 weeks.
Deborah Dorbert, in pain from her complicated pregnancy, does yoga on the back patio of her home in Lakeland, Fla. (Thomas Simonetti for The Washington Post)
Ever since the condition was identified more than 75 years ago by Edith Potter, a pioneering perinatal specialist, Potter syndrome has been considered a doubly lethal diagnosis. Without working kidneys, newborns are unable to rid their bodies of deadly toxins and go into renal failure. Without amniotic fluid in the womb, they are born unable to breathe.
“The real problem is underdeveloped lungs,” said Jena L. Miller, a specialist in fetal intervention at Johns Hopkins Hospital and principal investigator in the clinical trial investigating treatment of the syndrome. In healthy fetuses, she said, the spongelike organs expand in the womb, practicing breathing by inhaling amniotic fluid.
Babies with Potter syndrome often die before they are born when their umbilical cords become trapped between their bodies and the wall of their mother’s uterus. Those that survive the birth process typically suffocate within minutes or a matter of hours.
The choices are stark for parents whose babies’ severe defects are typically detected on anatomy scans midway through pregnancy. Apart from the clinical trial, which closed enrollment last July before Deborah discovered she was pregnant, and a few physicians who are experimenting with replacing amniotic fluid, there are no treatment options.
The couple said they decided on preterm induction as soon as possible out of concern for Deborah’s physical and mental health, worries about the baby suffering, and their desire to begin the grieving process.


 
Why do cons like torture? The cruelty to force the baby to be brought into the world just so it can die with awareness to its own existence is...sadistic. Well done Florida. Well done America.
Because sticking an instrument in the womb and chopping up the baby, then sucking the parts out and throwing them away is so much better
 
Because sticking an instrument in the womb and chopping up the baby, then sucking the parts out and throwing them away is so much better

Sometimes there are no good choices, and you have to pick the least bad option.

There are risks with abortions too, plus he mentioned torture without thinking about what the baby would go through.

So are you ok with death by decapitation for death row inmates? It is the same outcome?

Well I’m against the death penalty in all forms so, no.
 
RN, to some women abortion just isn't emotionally a big deal. I mean it clearly is to many folks. Humanists are a believe system. Rather they admit it or not. Why are pushing your believe system on them. It seems un American at it's core.
 
Really tough to follow your logic with these two statements.
How so?

in this situation, we’re talking about a situation where the baby isn’t going to survive. Depending on the medical specifics, there’s a more than decent chance that abortion is the safe option for the mother, as opposed to carrying the doomed baby to term, having to go thru labor, potential complications there, etc.

and for the death penalty. My biggest objection to the death penalty is that it’s a deeply flawed system and no one can guarantee that people will not get executed for crimes they didn’t commit. Objection #2 is that it’s never been shown to be an effective deterrent against crime.
 
Last edited:
Organ transplant is and if a person wants to sell an organ then they would be using health care.

You got owned and now you are moving the goal post. It is only freedom of choice when you allow a person the right to their body exclusively.
It's only healthcare for the transplant recipient. Not for the person trying to sell their organ.

The only one getting owned is you with your ongoing ignorance.
 
I can only assume that those that support what these FL doctors did here also believe that any doctor who follows the family's wishes takes someone off life support should face criminal charges? If we are going to do the fake "pro life" stuff lets at least be consistent
 
  • Like
Reactions: Urohawk
It's only healthcare for the transplant recipient. Not for the person trying to sell their organ.

The only one getting owned is you with your ongoing ignorance.

Okay idiot... if a family member donates a kidney to another family member, are you really going to say only one of them is using health care?

Try using your brain instead of your political bias.
 
Okay idiot... if a family member donates a kidney to another family member, are you really going to say only one of them is using health care?

Try using your brain instead of your political bias.
You've demonstrated your idiocy time and time again so I'm not going to engage your moronic responses past this one.

Only one is receiving care to improve their health which is the foundation of healthcare. And donating is not selling.

Carry on with your ignorant and lame posts.
 
  • Like
Reactions: sober_teacher
You've demonstrated your idiocy time and time again so I'm not going to engage your moronic responses past this one.

Only one is receiving care to improve their health which is the foundation of healthcare. And donating is not selling.

Carry on with your ignorant and lame posts.

You move the goalposts again. The argument isn't about whether it is health care or not. (It is by the way, thank you every medical book). The argument is about the freedom to choose what happens to one's body.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: RileyHawk
Organ transplant is and if a person wants to sell an organ then they would be using health care.

You got owned and now you are moving the goal post. It is only freedom of choice when you allow a person the right to their body exclusively.
You’re rambling. How exactly did I move any goalpost? Are you drunk?
 
  • Like
Reactions: RileyHawk
0_MSR_MAI_151021erin_01.jpg
 
Lots of innocent children that made it out of the womb. Who we turn a blind eye to slaughtering. At least if your believe system is consistent. Everytime u buy something made by essentially slave labor. Or we decide to a bomb country. With acceptable collateral damage.
who turns a blind eye to slaughtering of children?
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Tom Paris
You know that only about 1% of abortions happen after 24 weeks, right?

So roughly 6500 babies get tortured and murdered every year. No big deal right, plus I thought we were discussing this specific case
 
So roughly 6500 babies get tortured and murdered every year. No big deal right, plus I thought we were discussing this specific case

Yup, and in this case, we’re discussing a woman who we know her baby will at best survivor mere hours, if that, following its birth.

And that’s assuming it survives until that point. I can’t really call it murder in a scenario like this. Seems like the very definition of a medical exception to me.
 
Yup, and in this case, we’re discussing a woman who we know her baby will at best survivor mere hours, if that, following its birth.

And that’s assuming it survives until that point. I can’t really call it murder in a scenario like this. Seems like the very definition of a medical exception to me.
Have you ever read about the procedure they do to abort fetuses after 20 weeks gestation. Maybe you should, and if you have then maybe you should reevaluate your moral compass.
 
Have you ever read about the procedure they do to abort fetuses after 20 weeks gestation. Maybe you should, and if you have then maybe you should reevaluate your moral compass.
quit deflecting and stay on this particular case.

I've said many, many times on this subject. Personally, I am not pro-abortion. I'd like any woman who is considering it, to choose other options. But I'm a guy, I don't have kids myself and it's highly unlikely I'll ever be in the position of having to directly offer advice to someone who could potentially be in that situation.

But in this particular situation, where we KNOW the baby won't survive long, if at all, post-birth? I just can't find it in me to condemn the husband/wife here for at least seriously thinking about getting an abortion. That would just have to be a special kind of hell to carry a doomed baby around/watch your wife do so, for two months (or however long is left in the pregnancy at this point), maybe see it survive birth, then immediately make funeral arrangements. In this particular situation, I just don't know that i could disagree with an abortion.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT