The doctor says verbatim they are transferring the pt for foster care and it is not medically necessary. []

"What I want to do is admit this baby to Boise. Not because it is medically necessary ... but because then there is a few more degrees of seperation ... and then when they do not know, get the baby out with CPS to the foster parents"

There's no need to remind me about EMS in this case. I've been licensed in multiple states and obtained NREMT cert, and also transported pts. I'm well aware that for EMS purposes there would be absolutely zero implied consent to treat this baby without parental consent. In any case, part of the report is just quotes from the doctor who's own records reflect such.

>That sounds like the issue was with the police, not with medical malpractice. I'm skeptical, though, of "illegal secret prosecutions".

I'm not saying it is "malpractice" because malpractice has very specific statutory meaning. Acting within the bounds of the system, by removing consent, isn't legally malpractice. What doctors have done, is say "you better fucking do what I say, and give consent, or else I will call CPS, who will then ensure what I say is done, so do I have your consent?" That is not consent, because consent is not something that can be obtained under threat of violence of removing family members, even if you used a third party (CPS and armed men) to do it. That is just dictating the terms, and meting out punishment when the illusion of "consent" isn't obtained.

[] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Du-jbE022I

> The doctor says verbatim they are transferring the pt for foster care

The destination is literally a hospital. I'm not saying whether or not that was the ultimate goal, I'm just saying this PCR is a hospital to hospital transfer, with a higher level of care.