You described what you wanted someone to do, and got upset when they didn't do it.
Just because you worded it politely didn't mean you aren't ordering them.
By this threads logic when my buddy Kurt moved and he asked us to help he was ordering us to...
“next week I have to move my stuff”
“I need healing”
wow what orders what commands we expect our friends to help us if they can...so selfish
So, do you get upset/angry with your friends who don't move your stuff for you? If they have money, and you don't, and they don't give you money? If you keep on showing up hungry and without cash and state "I'm hungry" and they don't keep feeding you?
A friend who won't spend their weekends moving your stuff isn't a friend in your world?
If my friends help me move,
great,
thank you. If they don't,
no hair off of my back. They are under no obligation to help me move just because I want to move. If I moved 10 times and a friend never helped me move once, they are still my friend.
"Next week I need to move my stuff, I could use some help" I might ask; if I did, and they didn't help, that isn't
their flaw, it isn't
their fault, and they are still just as good a friend as before.
On the other hand, if I say "next week I need to move my stuff, I could use some help" and when someone doesn't step up, I consider them to be no longer my friend, I was actually ordering them to do it while using polite words.
Are you actually asking, or are you actually demanding while using "pleasant words"?
So she has to choose who to heal on the rare occasion both fighters need it. Her choice so far seems to be “nah I don’t heal... just drop”
That is a solid strategy.
(a) Dropping from full to KO in 1 round isn't something that happens often in 5e. If it does, healing someone above 0 HP is a waste of a round, as they will get plastered next round anyhow (you aren't healing them to full with most healing spells if they are taking that level of damage).
(b) If they took more than 1 round to drop, why aren't they spending their previous rounds guzzling healing potions if they think it is such a good plan? Obviously not.
(c) If they are spending every round guzzling healing potions
and still not keeping up with the incoming damage, having 2 people burning finite resources on keeping 1 person up is an even worse plan. You need to get the incoming damage
down ASAP.
There are exceptions. AOE damage countered by AOE healing is often worth the action; the damage is significant, widespread, and the action:heal ratio of the spells are good. The Heal spell is good action-efficiency (if not always slot-efficiency), as is Mass Heal. Healing word to bring someone up, or when your action isn't casting a spell and using a "spare" spell slot, is great.
Standing behind a fighter and spamming cure wounds, either with a low level slot (horrible action efficiency) or a high level slot (horrible slot efficiency) isn't a good plan in 5e.
Use your bonus action to move your spiritual weapon and smack the foe it. Use your action to cast command (flee), dodge (help maintain concentration on spiritual guardians, say), hit it with your hammer, or cast "toll the dead" (2d12 (13) sweet necrotic damage). All better action/spell economy than healing a fighter with cure wounds or healing word most of the time.
I mean, suppose the fighter has 7 HP. The enemy hits for 20. To soak a blow you'd have to drop a 3rd level cure wounds (3rd level slot, and an action). You get lucky, and heal for 18 (good roll!). The enemy hits for 20, and the fighter is down to 5 HP.
If you instead let the fighter drop, the fighter hits 0 HP. Next turn you healing word for 5 (1st level slot, bonus action) and the fighter is back up. At 5 HP.
Except now you spent 1 bonus action and a 1st level slot. Before you spent a full action and a 3rd level slot. And you ended up in the same place.
Even if
these numbers aren't perfect, the point that "healing after you drop" is a valid tactical plan in many situations is true. It isn't neglecting winning the fight.
If the "heal me" isn't a demand, now we have two people disagreeing over tactics. And a PC's tactics should be, all other things being equal, the job of the player whose PC that is, not the other players.
What, to me, is left is...