The court ruled in favor of the parents, and surgery was denied. An appeal was launched and a guardian ad litem was appointed. Confronted with the anguish of the birth of a child with severe physical disorders, these parents, in consequence of judicial procedures for which there is no precedent or authority, have been subjected in the last two weeks to litigation through all three levels of our State's court system. We find no justification for resort to or entertainment of these proceedings. However, in a surprising turn of events, the parents of Baby Jane Doe changed their minds and surgery followed - Baby Jane Doe had a shunt installed to close her back.
Inaccurate prognosis can prove to be fatal.
In popular debate, the question whether children with disabilities should be denied lifesaving treatment has frequently been couched as though the issue were whether the government should intrude into matters of parental discretion. In fact, however, for decades the universally accepted law has been that when parents make treatment decisions that will undebatably lead to the death of their nondisabled children, the state will intervene to ensure the children's survival by mandating provision of life-saving medical care. It is only when the children have disabilities that the claim of parental autonomy is given serious sympathetic consideration. No one can argue that an infant cannot defend his or her right to life. Still not one physician has been convicted for these murders.