The fever had broken after seeing the doctor and the only reason the doctor thought it might be life threatening is because the baby was also lethargic. The article does not read how long the fever remained high. But I’ll assume since the parents did seek medical care when the child was ill if the fever had not broken quickly they would have gone to the hospital.
Now again, if the doctor felt the baby was in need of immediate medical attention at a facility able to provide testing and treatment she could not she should have called for an ambulance. She didn’t. So just how life threatening did she really believe the symptoms were?
Hate to tell you but you’re using faulty logic here.
Clearly you are projecting and drawing conclusions based on assumptions that may or may not be true.
Or is it that you are first drawing a conclusion, and retrofitting your assumptions to ‘prove’ your conclusion?