AAM, what is your take on this?
But part of the problem is that the emergency departments are overloaded with charity patients who use the ER as their primary care physician and never pay a dime. Obviously that's why Texas is at ground zero on this issue.
IIRC, the baby that they mention was an uninsured child of an indigent parent, and had a severe genetic disease that meant he could not survive more than a few months, no matter what care he received. The extraordinary measures needed to keep him technically "alive" though comatose were incredibly expensive.
Obviously hard cases make bad law, but resources ARE finite. What if spending millions for a child who cannot survive means that a hundred children don't get care that could cure them completely?
It bothers me though that the bishops are getting involved. They at least ought to be arguing on the side of life. There are plenty of people to argue the bottom line.