Mom Who Refused to Abort Survived Cancer – But Now Her Baby Is Fighting This Rare Disease

A miracle baby whose mom says saved her from dying of cancer is now fighting to live with a rare genetic condition that damages the immune system.

Single mom of two Katie Hanson shared her incredible story on radio Tuesday. Diagnosed with cervical cancer at age 21 while pregnant, Hanson was advised by doctors to have an abortion.

“You’re 21 years old, and you think you’re invincible. I remember being 21 years old and thinking, ‘Never going to die,’” Glenn said.

Today, Hanson is healthy, but Willow has since been diagnosed with a rare genetic disease that is terminal and affects the immune system. If Willow even gets a cold, she could die, so she requires around-the-clock care just to stay alive. Diagnosed with inclusion-cell (I-cell) disease at 8 months, 2-year-old Willow is one of just 72 people in the world believed to have the rare genetic disorder.

Hanson refused to undergo cancer treatments until she safely delivered baby Willow, saying her baby saved her life because cancer would have gone unnoticed without her pregnancy scans.

“I believe that God gave me Willow exactly when he knew that I needed Willow,” Hanson said. “Knowing the contents of my heart, that I would go through to see her life happen … then I would be there when she would need me.”

This article provided courtesy of TheBlaze.

GLENN: So you're 21 years old, and you think you're invincible. I remember being 21 years old and thinking, "Never going to die." Now every day you get up, and you're like, "It could be today."

You're young. You're healthy. You have your whole life in front of you. And that is what Katie thought. She had no idea that anything was wrong with her, until she went in for a routine ultrasound with her second child Willow. And during the ultrasound, it was discovered that Katie had cervical cancer. And the doctor said, "You have to abort your child. You're going to die. The child is going to die." She said, "I won't abort my child." She had to start treatment right away. And the answer was, "No. I'm not going to kill my child."

She was determined to meet the angel that she says saved her life. If it hadn't been for Willow, she would have never known she had cancer. Katie carried Willow to term, and the doctors were able to remove the cancer. Katie was ecstatic. She was cancer-free and mom to a beautiful baby girl. And then trouble set in. Willow stopped eating a couple of months in. The little girl was rushed to the hospital. Stayed there for most of her first year. She dealt with pneumonia and heart failure and respiratory failure. It was one thing after the other. Weeks and weeks of testing. And finally she was diagnosed with a rare terminal condition called Inclusive-cell disease, which inhibits growth and breathing and heart function, digestion, everything. There are only 72 confirmed cases in the world.

And despite her ailments, Willow was finally released from the hospital just in time for her first birthday. And Katie was excited to finally have Willow home, where she could give her the support and love she needed most. While preparing for her birthday, Katie encountered another blow: She became the victim of domestic violence and found herself now a single mother of two young children. The reason why I'm telling you this story is because there is a remarkable person inside mom. Because Katie hasn't lost hope. She is now doing her best to provide for her son and Willow all on her own. And she says, "I am not going to let Willow down because Willow saved my life." And now she vows to save Willow's life. Katie joins us now. Hi, Katie, how are you?

KATIE: Hi, thank you. I'm good. And you?

GLENN: I'm good. This is a remarkable story.

KATIE: Thank you.

GLENN: How is -- how is Willow?

KATIE: Oh, she's doing great. She's still snoozing right now. She loves her sleep. And loves to sleep in. So...

GLENN: And she spent -- in her first year, she spent all, but 12 days in the hospital?

KATIE: From November 18th of 2016 -- or, sorry. January 16th to November 10th of 2016, all, but 12 days was spent between our tiny hospital back in Montana and Seattle children's hospital.

GLENN: So, Katie, what do you say to people who will make the case -- and I'm sure they've made it to you.

KATIE: Uh-huh.

GLENN: They'll make the case that, see, you would have been better off. She would have been better off had she never been born.

You know, I could imagine people even said, "God intended her -- you were supposed to do that. That's why she's suffering from all of this." Even though you didn't know.

KATIE: Yeah.

GLENN: How do you respond to that?

KATIE: We've gotten a lot of it and stuff. Especially with the articles going around. There's always those people who are like, "Oh, well, why bring a child into the world, knowing you have cancer, that your cancer is going to affect them, or knowing that something is wrong with your baby and so on and so forth?"

And I take it as an educational moment. Because, one, my cancer did not affect Willow in any way, shape, or form. Cervical cancer has no way to affect an unborn child. Also, cervical cancer cannot cause a genetic mutation, which is what Willow has. And with I-cell being so, so, so rare, obviously -- most people in the world are not aware of it, and most doctors do not even know of its existence -- there's no way to test for it in the womb, unless, say, I have another child. Now we know Willow's exact DNA mutation. We would be able to check to see if that child also has that exact DNA mutation. But when it's your first go-around with a child that you've never had, you know, you didn't have a previous I-cell child, you're kind of in the blind of all of it. Willow was extensively monitored. She was very healthy. She developed totally normal and stuff. So, I mean, people call me selfish for not aborting and stuff. And I'm like, calling me selfish would be calling every other woman in the world selfish because we all put our children at the same exact risk while they're in the womb. There's over 7,000 other rare diseases and stuff that most of them cannot be detected until well after your child is born.

GLENN: Had you known what Willow is going through now, would your answer have been different?

KATIE: I don't think so. I mean, I would never judge on somebody else's choice of whether they keep or abort their child and stuff. But for me, that's just -- it's not in the cards for me. I don't think I could bring myself to do that. I believe that every life out there has a very divine purpose. And stuff. And I believe that God gave me Willow exactly when he knew that I needed Willow, knowing the contents of my heart, that, you know, I would go through to see her life happen and stuff. Then I would be there when she needed me and stuff.

GLENN: And Willow is not expected to live possibly past ten?

KATIE: Yeah. Prognosis, medical prognosis at best is ten years old. There have been a few -- very few kiddoes with this that have made it shortly past ten. But the average span of these kids is three to five years. Because there's no treatment at all whatsoever because there's so little funding happening. There's no government or federal funding like there is for cancer researches and that kind of thing. That doesn't happen. All of the research funding comes directly from, you know, the few families that have been affected.

GLENN: I -- Katie, I will tell you that I'm from a family that has a long history of abuse. And I --

KATIE: Uh-huh.

GLENN: I commend you for getting out, especially in your situation, with two children. One of them is severely sick.

KATIE: Uh-huh.

GLENN: A lot of people will convince themselves that they either deserve it or it's the -- it's the pressure on him. Or, you know, whatever the excuse is.

KATIE: Uh-huh.

GLENN: How -- how difficult was the -- how difficult was it to make the decision, or was it strangely for you just obvious?

KATIE: Well, I mean, it was -- you're kind of in the situation for a while. Like, once Willow started getting sick, unfortunately, her father -- because of the way he grew up, the only way he knew how to cope was to have alcohol to drown out everything he needed to cope. So it was going on for a while. I repeatedly to try to find him help. Get him help and stuff. He would start seeing counselors. And it would get better. But then he would push off and fall back again. It's really true what they say when they say, you can't help somebody who doesn't want to be helped.

But after her terminal diagnosis, it really spiraled for a while. But after she came home, it seemed like things were getting better and stuff. Like, we got into a routine and everything.

I think probably -- he hadn't drank in a while even. But I think what spiked it was, you know, that -- it was Willow's birthday the next day, and even though every birthday just like for every family is a huge milestone, and like it's very exciting for us, it's also extremely, extremely bittersweet and stuff because we know we're not going to have very many of them. So I think that kind of got to him. And that's what stemmed his drinking afterwards that night. For when he came home. And, you know, I don't hold any bad blood for him because none of us know how we're going to cope with something like this. You know, none of us are going to say what's going to happen or how we're going to handle a situation like this, until we're all on the front line of it. And we all have different coping mechanisms. That doesn't mean that what he did was okay. That there's any excuse for it. But once things became physical and once things posed risks to my children and stuff -- again, my life is for my children, just like when I was pregnant with Willow. Like, I will not let anything in the pathway of harming them. So when it became --

GLENN: Go ahead.

KATIE: Yeah. When it became physical, it was -- you know, at that point and stuff -- like obviously police were called. And he was removed from the house.

GLENN: Easy.

KATIE: And since then, we haven't had contact with him.

GLENN: So when I saw your story online, Willow is dependent on 24/7 feeding tube. She's on heart and oxygen monitors. Medication from 6:00 to 10:00 p.m. BiPAP at night. Requires what is called deep suctioning, threading of suction catheter through her nose and the airway. This is so -- so harsh for you.

You -- you list all the things that you have to do. And now that you are -- you are out -- you can't go to a shelter because --

KATIE: No.

GLENN: -- you -- you can't -- you can't bring Willow into the shelter. She gets a cold, and she can die.

KATIE: Uh-huh. Yes.

GLENN: You've been accepted on a housing wait list. Which you said, "Could lift our biggest stressor from our shoulders." And the list is long. And we're close to the end and not likely to receive some help until at some point next year. We're just doing all we can for a roof over our heads. You had a goal of $5,000. And you were -- last I checked, you were at $2,900.

KATIE: Uh-huh.

GLENN: That doesn't seem like an awful lot of money to believe just to keep the roof over your head. It seems --

KATIE: It's not. Yeah, it's not the -- I'm one of those people, I have a very hard time asking for help as it is. And like, I don't really set my goals too big because I don't want to be disappointed. And I don't want to come off like I'm asking for a handout. You know, I'm asking the world of people. That's not the person I am. So...

GLENN: You're remarkable, Katie. You're remarkable.

KATIE: Thank you.

GLENN: And I applaud you for your strength. And expect miracles because they will happen. Thank you, Katie. God bless.

KATIE: Uh-huh.

GLENN: Wow can we change her life.

STU: Yeah. Really have a chance to do something for somebody. Katie Hanson and her daughter Willow Ray Porter. They're up on YouCaring.com. Actually, let me send it right now. Just posted on Twitter @worldofStu, if you want to donate and help. I mean, she only needs a couple thousand dollars. This audience can do that in like nine seconds.

GLENN: Let's change her life. Did you hear her, the way she spoke, I don't want to ask for help. I mean, holy cow, let's change her life. We just tweeted how you can help. Join us on that, will you?

Episode 6 of Glenn’s new history podcast series The Beck Story releases this Saturday.

This latest installment explores the history of Left-wing bias in mainstream media. Like every episode of this series, episode 6 is jam-packed with historical detail, but you can’t squeeze in every story, so some inevitably get cut from the final version. Part of this episode involves the late Ben Bradlee, who was the legendary editor of the Washington Post. Bradlee is legendary mostly because of the Watergate investigation that was conducted on his watch by two young reporters named Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein. Bradlee, Woodward, and Bernstein became celebrities after the release of the book and movie based on their investigation called All the President’s Men.

But there is another true story about the Washington Post that you probably won’t see any time soon at a theater near you.

In 1980, Washington Post editor Ben Bradlee wanted to expand the Post’s readership in the black community. The paper made an effort to hire more minority journalists, like Janet Cooke, a black female reporter from Ohio. Cooke was an aggressive reporter and a good writer. She was a fast-rising star on a staff already full of stars. The Post had a very competitive environment and Cooke desperately wanted to win a Pulitzer Prize.

Readers were hooked. And outraged.

When Cooke was asked to work on a story about the D.C. area’s growing heroin problem, she saw her chance to win that Pulitzer. As she interviewed people in black neighborhoods that were hardest hit by the heroin epidemic, she was appalled to learn that even some children were heroin addicts. When she learned about an eight-year-old heroin addict named Jimmy, she knew she had her hook. His heartbreaking story would surely be her ticket to a Pulitzer.

Cooke wrote her feature story, titling it, “Jimmy’s World.” It blew away her editors at the Post, including Bob Woodward, who by then was Assistant Managing Editor. “Jimmy’s World” would be a front-page story:

'Jimmy is 8 years old and a third-generation heroin addict,' Cooke’s story began, 'a precocious little boy with sandy hair, velvety brown eyes and needle marks freckling the baby-smooth skin of his thin brown arms. He nestles in a large, beige reclining chair in the living room of his comfortably furnished home in Southeast Washington. There is an almost cherubic expression on his small, round face as he talks about life – clothes, money, the Baltimore Orioles and heroin. He has been an addict since the age of 5.'

Readers were hooked. And outraged. The mayor’s office instructed the police to immediately search for Jimmy and get him medical treatment. But no one was able to locate Jimmy. Cooke wasn’t surprised. She told her editors at the Post that she had only been able to interview Jimmy and his mother by promising them anonymity. She also revealed that the mother’s boyfriend had threatened Cooke’s life if the police discovered Jimmy’s whereabouts.

A few months later, Cooke’s hard work paid off and her dream came true – her story was awarded the Pulitzer Prize for feature writing. Cooke had to submit some autobiographical information to the Prize committee, but there was a slight snag. The committee contacted the Post when they couldn’t verify that Cooke had graduated magna cum laude from Vassar College. Turns out she only attended Vassar her freshman year. She actually graduated from the University of Toledo with a B.A. degree, not with a master’s degree as she told the Pulitzer committee.

Cooke’s editors summoned her for an explanation. Unfortunately for Cooke and the Washington Post, her resume flubs were the least of her lies. After hours of grilling, Cooke finally confessed that “Jimmy’s World” was entirely made up. Jimmy did not exist.

The Pulitzer committee withdrew its prize and Cooke resigned in shame. The Washington Post, the paper that uncovered Watergate – the biggest political scandal in American history – failed to even vet Cooke’s resume. Then it published a front-page, Pulitzer Prize-winning feature story that was 100 percent made up.

Remarkably, neither Ben Bradlee nor Bob Woodward resigned over the incident. It was a different time, but also, the halo of All the President’s Men probably saved them.

Don’t miss the first five episodes of The Beck Story, which are available now. And look for Episode 6 this Saturday, wherever you get your podcasts.


5 Democrats who have endorsed Kamala (and two who haven't)

Zach Gibson / Stringer, Brandon Bell / Staff | Getty Images

With Biden removed from the 2024 election and only a month to find a replacement before the DNC, Democrats continue to fall in line and back Vice President Kamala Harris to headline the party's ticket. Her proximity and familiarity with the Biden campaign along with an endorsement from Biden sets Harris up to step into Biden's shoes and preserve the momentum from his campaign.

Glenn doesn't think Kamala Harris is likely to survive as the assumed Democratic nominee, and once the DNC starts, anything could happen. Plenty of powerful and important Democrats have rallied around Harris over the last few days, but there have been some crucial exemptions. Here are five democrats that have thrown their name behind Harris, and two SHOCKING names that didn't...

Sen. Dick Durbin: ENDORSED

Chip Somodevilla / Staff | Getty Images

High-ranking Senate Democrat Dick Durbin officially put in his support for Harris in a statement that came out the day after Biden stepped down: “I’m proud to endorse my former Senate colleague and good friend, Vice President Kamala Harris . . . our nation needs to continue moving forward with unity and not MAGA chaos. Vice President Harris was a critical partner in building the Biden record over the past four years . . . Count me in with Kamala Harris for President.”

Michigan Gov. Whitmer: ENDORSED

Chip Somodevilla / Staff | Getty Images

The Monday after Biden stepped down from the presidential VP hopeful, Gretchen Whitmer released the following statement on X: “Today, I am fired up to endorse Kamala Harris for president of the United States [...] In Vice President Harris, Michigan voters have a presidential candidate they can count on to focus on lowering their costs, restoring their freedoms, bringing jobs and supply chains back home from overseas, and building an economy that works for working people.”

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez: ENDORSED

Drew Angerer / Staff | Getty Images

Mere hours after Joe Biden made his announcement, AOC hopped on X and made the following post showing her support: "Kamala Harris will be the next President of the United States. I pledge my full support to ensure her victory in November. Now more than ever, it is crucial that our party and country swiftly unite to defeat Donald Trump and the threat to American democracy. Let’s get to work."

Rep. Nancy Pelosi: ENDORSED

Anna Moneymaker / Staff | Getty Images

Former Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who is arguably one of the most influential democrats, backed Harris's campaign with the following statement given the day after Biden's decision: “I have full confidence she will lead us to victory in November . . . My enthusiastic support for Kamala Harris for President is official, personal, and political.”

Sen. Elizabeth Warren: ENDORSED

Drew Angerer / Stringer | Getty Images

Massasschesets Senator Elizabeth Warren was quick to endorse Kamala, releasing the following statement shortly after Harris placed her presidential bid: "I endorse Kamala Harris for President. She is a proven fighter who has been a national leader in safeguarding consumers and protecting access to abortion. As a former prosecutor, she can press a forceful case against allowing Donald Trump to regain the White House. We have many talented people in our party, but Vice President Harris is the person who was chosen by the voters to succeed Joe Biden if needed. She can unite our party, take on Donald Trump, and win in November."

Former President Barack Obama: DID NOT ENDORSE

Spencer Platt / Staff | Getty Images

Former President Barack Obama wasted no time releasing the following statement which glaringly omits any support for Harris or any other candidate. Instead, he suggests someone will be chosen at the DNC in August: "We will be navigating uncharted waters in the days ahead. But I have extraordinary confidence that the leaders of our party will be able to create a process from which an outstanding nominee emerges. I believe that Joe Biden's vision of a generous, prosperous, and united America that provides opportunity for everyone will be on full display at the Democratic Convention in August. And I expect that every single one of us are prepared to carry that message of hope and progress forward into November and beyond."

Prominent Democratic Donor John Morgan: DID NOT ENDORSE

AP Photo/John Raoux

Prominent and wealthy Florida lawyer and democrat donor John Morgan was clearly very pessimistic about Kamala's odds aginst Trump when he gave the following statement: “You have to be enthusiastic or hoping for a political appointment to be asking friends for money. I am neither. It’s others turn now . . . The donors holding the 90 million can release those funds in the morning. It’s all yours. You can keep my million. And good luck . . . [Harris] would not be my first choice, but it’s a done deal.”

How did Trump's would-be assassin get past Secret Service?

PATRICK T. FALLON / Contributor | Getty Images

Editor's Note: This article was originally published on TheBlaze.com.

Former President Donald Trump on Saturday was targeted in an assassination attempt during a campaign rally in Pennsylvania. It occurred just after 6:10 p.m. while Trump was delivering his speech.

Here are the details of the “official” story. The shooter was Thomas Matthew Crooks. He was 20 years old from Bethel Park, Pennsylvania. He used an AR-15 rifle and managed to reach the rooftop of a nearby building unnoticed. The Secret Service's counter-response team responded swiftly, according to "the facts," killing Crooks and preventing further harm.

Did it though? That’s what the official story says, so far, but calling this a mere lapse in security by Secret Service doesn't add up. There are some glaring questions that need to be answered.

If Trump had been killed on Saturday, we would be in a civil war today. We would have seen for the first time the president's brains splattered on live television, and because of the details of this, I have a hard time thinking it wouldn't have been viewed as JFK 2.0.

How does someone sneak a rifle onto the rally grounds? How does someone even know that that building is there? How is it that Thomas Matthew Crooks was acting so weird and pacing in front of the metal detectors, and no one seemed to notice? People tried to follow him, but, oops, he got away.

How could the kid possibly even think that the highest ground at the venue wouldn't be watched? If I were Crooks, my first guess would be, "That’s the one place I shouldn't crawl up to with a rifle because there's most definitely going to be Secret Service there." Why wasn't anyone there? Why wasn't anyone watching it? Nobody except the shooter decided that the highest ground with the best view of the rally would be the greatest vulnerability to Trump’s safety.

Moreover, a handy ladder just happened to be there. Are we supposed to believe that nobody in the Secret Service, none of the drones, none of the things we pay millions of dollars for caught him? How did he get a ladder there? If the ladder was there, was it always there? Why was the ladder there? Secret Service welds manhole covers closed when a president drives down a road. How was there a ladder sitting around, ready to climb up to the highest ground at the venue, and the Secret Service failed to take it away?

There is plenty of video of eyewitnesses yelling that there was a guy with a rifle climbing up on a ladder to the roof for at least 120 seconds before the first shot was fired. Why were the police looking for him while Secret Service wasn't? Why did the sniper have him in his sights for over a minute before he took a shot? Why did a cop climb up the ladder to look around? When Thomas Matthew Cooks pointed a gun at him, he then ducked and came down off the ladder. Did he call anyone to warn that this young man had a rifle within range of the president?

How is it the Secret Service has a female bodyguard who doesn't even reach Trump's nipples? How was she going to guard the president's body with hers? How is it another female Secret Service agent pulled her gun out a good four minutes too late, then looked around, apparently not knowing what to do? She then couldn't even get the pistol back into the holster because she's a Melissa McCarthy body double. I don't think it's a good idea to have Melissa McCarthy guarding the president.

Here’s the critical question now: Who trusts the FBI with the shooter’s computer? Will his hard drive get filed with the Nashville manifesto? How is it that the Secret Service almost didn't have snipers at all but decided to supply them only one day before the rally because all the local resources were going to be put on Jill Biden? I want Jill Biden safe, of course. I want Jill Biden to have what the first lady should have for security, but you can’t hire a few extra guys to make sure our candidates are safe?

How is it that we have a Secret Service director, Kimberly Cheatle, whose experience is literally guarding two liters of Squirt and spicy Doritos? Did you know that's her background? She's in charge of the United States Secret Service, and her last job was as the head of security for Pepsi.

This is a game, and that's what makes this sick. This is a joke. There are people in our country who thought it was OK to post themselves screaming about the shooter’s incompetence: “How do you miss that shot?” Do you realize how close we came to another JFK? If the president hadn't turned his head at the exact moment he did, it would have gone into the center of his head, and we would be a different country today.

Now, Joe Biden is also saying that we shouldn't make assumptions about the motive of the shooter. Well, I think we can assume one thing: He wanted to kill the Republican presidential candidate. Can we agree on that at least? Can we assume that much?

How can the media even think of blaming Trump for the rhetoric when the Democrats and the media constantly call him literally worse than Hitler who must be stopped at all costs?

These questions need to be answered if we want to know the truth behind what could have been one of the most consequential days in U.S. history. Yet, the FBI has its hands clasped on all the sources that could point to the truth. There must be an independent investigation to get to the bottom of these glaring “mistakes.”

POLL: Do you think Trump is going to win the election?

Kevin Dietsch / Staff, Chip Somodevilla / Staff, Kevin Dietsch / Staff | Getty Image

It feels like all of the tension that has been building over the last four years has finally burst to the surface over the past month. Many predicted 2024 was going to be one of the most important and tumultuous elections in our lifetimes, but the last two weeks will go down in the history books. And it's not over yet.

The Democratic National Convention is in August, and while Kamala seems to be the likely candidate to replace Biden, anything could happen in Chicago. And if Biden is too old to campaign, isn't he too old to be president? Glenn doesn't think he'll make it as President through January, but who knows?

There is a lot of uncertainty that surrounds the current political landscape. Trump came out of the attempted assassination, and the RNC is looking stronger than ever, but who knows what tricks the Democrats have up their sleeves? Let us know your predictions in the poll below:

Is Trump going to win the election?

Did the assassination attempt increase Trump's chances at winning in November?

Did Trump's pick of J.D. Vance help his odds?

Did the Trump-Biden debate in June help Trump's chances?

Did Biden's resignation from the election hand Trump a victory in November? 

Do the Democrats have any chance of winning this election?