"I told them that they had chosen me to carry and protect this child, and that was exactly what I was going to do," Kelley said. "I told them it wasn't their decision to play God."
Then she walked out of the room.
"I couldn't look at them anymore," she said.
$10,000 to have an abortion
The next day, according to medical records, the mother called Hartford Hospital to ask about different types of abortion. It was explained to her that they could induce birth (the baby wouldn't survive) or they could do a dilation and evacuation, in which case the pregnancy would be vacuumed out of the womb. The mother, after asking about whether the fetus would feel any pain, said she thought the second option was best.
She asked if the procedure had been scheduled. No, she was told. Only Kelley could do that.
The mother noted that the surrogacy agency was getting in touch with Kelley, and a few days later, Kelley received an e-mail from Rita Kron at Surrogacy International telling her that if she chose to have the baby, the couple wouldn't agree to be the baby's legal parents.
"You will be the only person who will be making decision about the child, should the child is born (sic)," Kron wrote.
CNN contacted Surrogacy International, and a woman who said her name was Rita answered the phone.
"You have to understand something -- there is a privacy that exists and that's the end of the story," she said and then hung up. Kron did not return CNN's e-mails.
Kelley didn't want to be the baby's mother -- she'd gotten pregnant to help another family, not to have a child of her own. Kron gave her an option: the parents would pay her $10,000 to have an abortion.
The offer tested Kelley's convictions. She'd always been against abortion for religious and moral reasons, but she really needed the money. Just before getting pregnant, she'd lost her job as a nanny, and the only income she had coming in was child support from her daughters' father and her monthly surrogacy fee of $2,222, which was about to end because of the dispute with the parents.
Her resolve began to falter. Then it nearly crumbled.
Kron took Kelley to lunch.
"She painted a picture of a life of a person who had a child with special needs. She told me how it would be painful, it would be taxing, it would be strenuous and stressful. She told me it would financially drain me, that my children would suffer because of it," Kelley remembers.
Kelley had a counter offer. "In a weak moment I asked her to tell them that for $15,000 I would consider going forward with the termination," she said.
But as soon as she got in the car to go home, she regretted it, Kelley said.
Kron let Kelley know the parents had refused to pay $15,000. By that point, it didn't matter to Kelley -- she'd decided against abortion no matter what. Kron sent her an e-mail asking if she'd scheduled the appointment for the abortion.
Kelley wrote back a one-word answer: no.
'TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE'
On February 22, 2012, six days after the fateful ultrasound, Kelley received a letter. The parents had hired a lawyer.
"You are obligated to terminate this pregnancy immediately," wrote Douglas Fishman, an attorney in West Hartford, Connecticut. "You have squandered precious time."
On March 5, Kelley would be 24 weeks pregnant, and after that, she couldn't legally abort the pregnancy, he said.
"TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE," he wrote.
Fishman reminded Kelley that she'd signed a contract, agreeing to "abortion in case of severe fetus abnormality." The contract did not define what constituted such an abnormality.
Kelley was in breach of contract, he wrote, and if she did not abort, the parents would sue her to get back the fees they'd already paid her -- around $8,000 -- plus all of the medical expenses and legal fees.
Fishman declined to comment on the specifics of the case.
"The situation... is complicated. It's very complicated," Fishman said.
Speaking generally, he said everyone who enters into a surrogacy contact needs to be clear from the beginning about what they are willing and able to do.
"When there's a lack of clarity then you start to have a recipe for problems," he said. "You want to position yourself to not have to be addressing these kinds of issues for the first time when the crisis hits."
After receiving Fishman's letter, Kelley decided it was time to get her own attorney.
Michael DePrimo, an attorney in Hamden, Connecticut, took the case for free. He explained that no matter what the contract said, she couldn't be forced to have an abortion.
DePrimo sent an e-mail to Fishman, the parents' lawyer, stating that Kelley was not going to have an abortion.
"Ms. Kelley was more than willing to abort this fetus if the dollars were right," Fishman shot back.
"The not-so-subtle insinuation that Ms. Kelley attempted to extort money from your clients is unfounded and reprehensible," DePrimo responded. "If you wish to propose a solution to this unspeakable tragedy, I will listen and apprize my client accordingly (sic)."
"However, as I mentioned in my previous correspondence, abortion is off the table and will not be considered under any circumstance," he said.
A secret flight
In an affidavit filed in Connecticut Superior Court, DePrimo described what happened next.
DePrimo received a phone call from Fishman telling him the parents had changed their minds. They now planned to exercise their legal right to take custody of their child -- and then immediately after birth surrender her to the state of Connecticut. She would become a ward of the state.
DePrimo explained to Kelley that this was no empty threat. Under state law, they were the parents, not her, and under Connecticut's Safe Haven Act for Newborns, parents can voluntarily give up custody of a baby less than a month old without being arrested for child abandonment.