Fourth, in 27 cases the disputed treatment was unilaterally withdrawn. My central theme in this essay is that ethics committees should not have unchecked authority to make these life-and-death decisions. Under the TADA, the judge is effectively muzzled from engaging in the decision itself, from expressing the view “I think the ethics committee made a mistake here.” Dr. Fine has argued that this is a virtue of the TADA, since it prevents judges from meddling in the “medical facts” of the case. But, his position simply highlights the greatly mistaken assumption that these cases hinge primarily on the “medical facts.” In truth, the conflicts in these cases almost always center on disagreements over values and beliefs. And while physicians are legitimately the experts on the medical facts, they are not experts on adjudicating values; that is why we have a legal system.