The difference in the second case is that there were people willing to bring the child to Mass and to see to his religious education. This is not present in the first case you mention.
Please direct me to the exact place where it says “church requires we defer the baptism until such hope is present”
I’m always happy to oblige:
Can. 868 §1 For an infant to be baptised lawfully it is required:
1° that the parents, or at least one of them, or the person who lawfully holds their place, give their consent;
2° that there be a well-founded hope that the child will be brought up in the catholic religion. If such hope is truly lacking, the baptism is, in accordance with the provisions of particular law, to be deferred and the parents advised of the reason for this.
§2 An infant of catholic parents, indeed even of non-catholic parents, may in danger of death be baptised even if the parents are opposed to it
As you can see, I didn’t make this up. It’s the law of the Church!