What you just said is the logic that Obamacare uses. That is why they want death panels, don't “waste” money on “hopeless” people.
There’s the world of difference between a government-mandated control of healthcare that has rationing panels, and the suggestion that saving 10 babies whom the experts say aren’t beyond hope is perhaps a better idea, for the same resources, than saving one that is.
Those who are wishing for a hospital to take on this one are wishing the direction of someone else’s resources, not their own, to the rescue. I don’t see what is wrong about pointing out that the same resources could help more babies elsewhere.
Also, your logic, to just save the one even if it leads to more policies that harm more in the future—that is, sparing Canada the need to take care of high-cost baby care cases, because some American hospital may take it on as a charity case—is exactly the logic that created our destructive welfare system.