Reading the source article, it appears the real problem is not the meds, but rather she talked to Trump. Thats more like "party above all else" if you ask me.
“At the end of the day, we have political systems,” said Jonathan Kinloch, chairman of the organization. “We have political parties, and political parties exist for a reason."
“They do not belong to themselves,” Kinloch said of endorsed candidates and elected officials. “They belong to the members and precinct delegates of the Democratic Party"
But, on the question of the meds, in an emergency situation where no proven or tested remedy exists, you would prefer that people don't try and perhaps die, rather than trying? Its a call for the Dr. and patient to make, in my book. After the fact folks still have the right to talk about their experience, unless that right has been removed, and I somehow missed it.
In reading the original
Detroit News article, it certainly does appear that there's some of that at work. FWIW, I think it's wrong, but in this case I'm comfortable with the idea that they did the right thing for the wrong reasons.
I agree with your second point as well, and though it doesn't come up much, one of the things that I agree with the Trump administration and many of my conservative friends on (along with their criminal justice reform policies - another example of "right thing/wrong reasons" - and the willingness to engage with North Korea) is their "right to try" advocacy, but "between doctor and patient" is a far cry from "between doctor, patient, and a guy who knows little but thinks he knows everything." Put another way, "right to try" depends on responsible and fact-based understanding of "the medical" (as Trump might say), not the bumbling musings of a guy whose knowledge of anything besides debt-financed development projects seems to be... lacking.
