EXTRACTION? what a strange term for the family attorney to use. Her extraction?
IMO, this was a carefully chosen, very loaded word by the family's attorney.
He is using it to appear to be objective, as though it's just a synonym for 'removing', like 'transferring' or 'conveying' or 'transporting'.
'Extracting' has much nastier connotations and denotations as it is frequently used in military operations.
I believe that the attny chose it to heighten the impression that the hospital has been holding this child hostage. IMO, he also chose it to imply that the child is living and that her family are warriors, coming to rescue her and who are in danger of being attacked themselves. .
Here is the definition from Wikipedia. I hope that WS members with a background in the armed services or similar situations could give a more extensive context within which to put this classic bit of baiting.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extraction_(military)
"..In military tactics, extraction (also exfiltration or exfil), is the process of removing personnel when it is considered imperative that they be immediately relocated out of a hostile environment and taken to a secure area.
There are primarily two kinds of extraction:
Hostile: The subject involved is unwilling and is being moved by forceful coercion with the expectation of resistance. Essentially, it is kidnapping by military or intelligence forces.
Friendly: The subject involved is willing and is expected to cooperate with the personnel in the operation..."
So, IMO, this attorney is carefully building a strawman fallacy. He is willfully constructing a distorted version of the hospital's official position. By using this word with all its connotations, he is misrepresenting the position of every single security officer, medical student, volunteer, orderly, nurses' aide, LPN, RPN, Nurse Practitioner, Registered Nurse, technician, counsellor, Psychiatrist, intern, resident, physician and surgeon who practices in CHO. IMO, he is casting them all as the dangerous and corrupt "other", components of his adversary: CHO. As I see it, in his little story, they are obstacles who WANT Jahi to be dead and have therefore obstructed efforts to take Jahi from CHO to another place that will care for her. The attny's choice of word implies that all those professionals, whose training is to assist those in need, may interfere with the team that comes to physically put Jahi on a gurney and carry her to whatever place the family's advisors has found.
CHO is not a daycare where you can just roll up and show your ID and pick up your child. The hospital has to meet federal and state requirements in all its functions, and the transfer of a patient from CHO to another institution has to be made in compliance with all those regulations.The hospital is not being hostile when they ask for information, and, my guess, verification of that information. It may be difficult to come up with that information, JMO, if the facility is under construction and the staff are not yet in place. If the family wants to take Jahi home, as has been pointed out up-thread, that is another situation entirely.
IMO this choice of word has been made with malicious intent.