I'm just speculating, but I think what's going on here is pride and maybe a little bit of CYA by the hospital. I'm thinking that the doctors usually just tell parents that their little one didn't make it and the parents typically allow them to remove life support. This family is different, and bucked the doctor's opinion. They didn't accept the medical opinion that the baby was gone. One of the doctors early on said something about not wanting to do any more for the baby, that he had the needs of the living to attend to, and the parents got offended. The hospital got the doctor to apologize for his remarks, but now there is this suspicion that something could have been done, but the doctor didn't try. That's what I mean about CYA. I think this is a precursor to, "well it's not our fault, we couldn't help the baby." Therefore, they press the court to let them remove the life support.
I think it should be within the parents' rights to allow the baby to come home with them and give it a try. There's a reason for getting second and third opinions. Someone may have a treatment that the parents would like to try. It should be given a chance to work. There is too fast a rush by the hospital to label this as futile care. It's only been a few weeks.
Pride goeth before a fall. CYA is active in Haleigh's story, and probably Brett's as well. For the life of me, I just don't understand why the hospital took this to court. Your explanation is as good as any.
FWIW, the medical profession has been so subverted by HMO's and government interference, that doctors and nurses can come off cold and uncaring. They don't answer to their oath, but to their employer's bottom line. I don't think the doctor who made that unfortunate statement did it to hurt the parents, he just unconsciously stated what the new mission statement is.
It's only been a few weeks. Babies have been known to recuperate from these kinds of accidents. Let's keep Brett in our prayers.