the problem in these cases is that we necessarily only get a one sided story - the hospital can't comment (as it should be). Such emotive language is used in the press, for what is essentially a disagreement in the plans for treatment for this child.
when docotrs and patients fundamentally disagree, it is the correct course of action to put it to a neutral third party - the courts.
People seem to forget that if the courts decision had been to agree with the parents, the doctors/meical team would have complied with the order too, just as they are doing now