"Doctor shopping" is a term invented in order to deprive patients in pain of the medication they need; it has nothing to do with this case. The idiom you may ha

"Doctor shopping" is a term invented in order to deprive patients in pain of the medication they need; it has nothing to do with this case. The idiom you may have intended to use is "getting a second opinion". Many good physicians encourage this practice; many poor physicians do not. The yelling about suing the Connecticut facility occurred only after the Connecticut facility was suggested, which was six months into the kidnapping. I'm not surprised the patient and her family weren't so trusting at that time. There were probably financial considerations as well as legal ones to this suggested transfer. A good reporter might have investigated that. I'll stipulate that the family got more emotional than I would in the same situation. However, they didn't get any more emotional than one might expect. Their kid was dying, then they weren't allowed to see their dying kid. Emotional people can go to a mechanic and get their car fixed. They can go to the vet and get their dog fixed. They can go to an accountant and get their taxes done. What is so special about hospital physicians, that they should never have to deal with any emotion other than awestruck adoration? Answer: they're allowed to lock their customers in. The law might support it, but only in an ad hoc, "possession is 9/10" sense. They can tell the state "hey we've already kidnapped this kid and our lawyers are on the case" instead of "you should convince a judge to send armed police to kidnap this kid". That's why big hospitals with lots of lawyers do this sort of thing and smaller facilities don't. Calling these parents "awful" is just consequence-free internet big talking, joined in this case with left-hand/right-hand they-both-have-good-points-who-can-say pretend moderation. Less of that, please.