Due Process. Due process can be a minefield, and there are different types of due process.
In the US, it can mean as little as the Dept. of Health official making a quick determination ..... to a full blown court hearing. In the US, the application of "due process rights" can depend on whether the govenrment is trying to take away a whole group's rights (no prisoner can marry) versus an individual (these JW parents). Becuase we are dealing with an individual, it's called "procedural due process." The general test is a balancing test - would the cost of the Government delay be very great if Parents were allowed hearings prior to the denial of the benefit. What would be the damage to the Parents if they were denied a full benefit?"
In some places in the US, a judge will not rule "ahead of time/emergency", as the issue is not "ripe" (legal term). So, perhaps the Canadian judges would not rule ahead of time in this situation. I do not know .
If doctors/health officials thought time was of the essence (such that babies would have died or suffered set backs), the cost of delaying a hearing in order to grant the parents their right to a hearing, would likely have been too great. Second, what would have been the damage if the parents were denied their hearing? They would not have had their say in court, but would it have mattered anyway? I think not.
So, if this were in the US and in front of a jurisdiction that would not rule on the matter before it was ripe, I can see where the Dept of Children had to "swoop" in and make a quick determination. And, this determination would likely be legal.
Skeeter