That Guatemalan Doctor and Dan Woodard, the attorney who represented Jonee in court the day the judge made her final ruling, they both belong to organizations that are ideologically connected to one another. Woodard, apart from his regular practice over the years, has been with the Christian Legal Society for over 30 years. It is a nationwide network of Christian attorneys who are sort of 'on call' to represent or in Jonee's case (when the CHLA required her to have an attorney) make court appearances for.
Juan Pablo Zaldana, the Guatemalan Doctor, works for Asociacion de Medicos por los Derechos Humanos which is a Guatemalan "right to life" human rights group. (The kind that hates homosexuals). Their Facebook page is filled with Lifesite articles.
I feel there are deep pockets involved, but they are focused on making individual attorneys and doctors wealthier as opposed to passing it out to their clients. Especially since the appearance of the online 'funding' sites that suit their scams quite nicely, imo.
Anyhow, imo, they are all connected.
There is an opinion piece on the "lifesitenews" website that does not have an author, but purports to be written by an attorney involved with the Israel Stinson case. The link in that article is to the life legal defense fund, which does not have the article up. Anyway, to summarize (since we can do that here), there were 2 things that stood out to me.
First, the attorney/ author says that the doctors in Guatemala "agreed" to treat Israel without cost
during the last few weeks at the Guatemalan hospital. It is very wide open what "agreed" means, why only the last few weeks, and whether that means they enthusiastically "agreed", or "agreed" not to transfer Israel (for non-payment?) while they looked for another facility.
The second thing that stood out to me is that apparently the Life Legal Defense attorney was not close by, or even involved on a daily basis communicating with Jonee from the time they arrived in Los Angeles. The attorney/ author says Jonee called her "10 days ago" and said that CHLA was going to remove Israel's ventilator "the next day". The attorney says he or she flew to Los Angeles and "assisted" Jonee in filing the emergency injunction request (Aug 18). That was the TRO in place till Sept 9, and subsequently dissolved. The attorney also says that at the time he or she flew to LA, they assisted Jonee finding a "local attorney" to "work with Jonee going forward." That says they either weren't much involved, or not able to be involved going forward (or both).
It seems Life Legal Defense doesn't really accept a case from beginning to end as the primary attorneys, IMO, from these kind of comments. They pop in and out as needed for crises and emergency filings (they are donating their time), and try to find local attorneys who are like minded to take on the day to day stuff.
IMO, that is unethical. If they take on representation of a vulnerable family/ client, in the midst of a medical crisis, they should be there and available for ANYthing that comes up. And, of course, licensed in the state the patient is in. I realize that this level of practice and handing off the client, popping in and out, may not meet the state bar requirements for breach of ethics in the attorney/ client relationship, but as a general statement, this kind of attorney practice is why some see them as opportunistic and predatory.
They emphasize that they provide
donated legal services while representing Life Legal Defense, and to their agenda-driven organization (Life Legal Defense). That's important, because it says that they do not see their first obligation as the vulnerable clients they sporadically represent thru LLD. It's a left-handed way of saying their paying customers (or their "regular job") comes first, then the agenda of their non-profit. That puts the vulnerable clients pretty far down the list of priorities, IMO. So that may explain why, IMO, Jonee's legal approach was so disjointed and disconnected, requiring lots of last minute "emergency" filings.