Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: AKIron on May 12, 2003, 06:07:41 PM
-
Guess the law means little to these folks.
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20030512/ap_on_re_us/texas_legislature_rebellion_8
-
Unbelievable.
-
"I don't know where we're going. I don't know how we're going to get there," one Democratic lawmaker told The Associated Press on condition of anonymity as he packed before a Sunday night rendezvous.
woo hoooo! Road trip!!!!
-
Hopefully some of them will resist arrest.
-
Originally posted by funkedup
Hopefully some of them will resist arrest.
"May I suggest using your nightstick, officer"?
-
Originally posted by midnight Target
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"I don't know where we're going. I don't know how we're going to get there," one Democratic lawmaker told The Associated Press on condition of anonymity as he packed before a Sunday night rendezvous.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
woo hoooo! Road trip!!!!
You gotta admit, it was pretty clever of them to plug the Dem's 2004 presidential platform in the article.
-
Sounds like they need a new set of rules at the Texas House.
You get the government you deserve, cowboys.
-
Originally posted by Sandman_SBM
Sounds like they need a new set of rules at the Texas House.
I agree, no more democrats.
-
I think the two party system sucks, but I'd really like to see what kind of "government" would come out of Texas without the dems involved. I'm sure it would be great fun to watch from the outside.
We could take a pool to determine just how long before we would get to see fences and armed guards at the NM, OK, AR, and LA borders. :D
-
We could take a pool to determine just how long before we would get to see fences and armed guards at the NM, OK, AR, and LA borders.
To keep people out of Texas?
-
Typical liberal hipocracy. First time in 100 years in Texas that the dem's are out of power and they don't know how to act. So they won't play. How chicken ****. I think it will backfire on them. I haven't talked to one person today that isn't pissed off that they did something like this. Personally I think they should all have to spend a minimum of a night in jail. Would be cool also if they could be rounded up in NM and Ok and shipped over here in shackles.
Don't even have the balls to fight it out in the arena of ideas. Sorry my liberal friends but your leadership are bunch of whiney arsed pansies who don't know how to work if they aren't pounding thier "ideas" down the nation's throat. Thank GOD they are out of power and PLEASE let them stay that way!
-
Originally posted by ra
To keep people out of Texas?
No, to keep the Texans in.
-
the funny thing is if they were republicans most of you would be cheering them as heros.
amuricans are funny
-
Originally posted by Pongo
the funny thing is if they were republicans most of you would be cheering them as heros.
amuricans are funny
What bull****. Canadians are even funnier.
-
I don't think Republicans would ever pull a move like this, it's not in the nature of conservatism, maintaining the status quo, traditions, etc... Put this together with other recent moves by the Democrats during the election now with the confirmation of high court justicies and their current strategy becomes clear. It's too bad, all those smart people, and they can't come up with any good ideas to counter the Republicans, they are merely reduced to stunts like this. I anticipate this one to backfire more than other actions have, especially at the local level.
-
November is coming. Perhaps the voters of the districts the legislators are paid to represent remember this little escapade. In the short run, perhaps a bit of impeachment is in order. Certainly a lack of responsibility on the part of the escapees. :rolleyes:
-
hmmmm, "The 2003 Purge"
-
Hilarious and ludicrous at the same time. A case of mass mental illness.
The best line from the article: "We refuse to participate in an inherently unfair process that slams the door of opportunity in the face of Texas voters," they said in a statement read by state Sen. Rodney Ellis.
Unfortunately for Texas state house Democrats, they controlled minority rules while in the majority as well. One element of forward-thinking, strategic partisan leadership involves granting reasonable rights to the minority party because your own party may become the minority one day. If the process unfairly excludes now-minority Democrats, it's because then-majority Democrats designed it that way. In so doing, they've probably also made it very difficult to ensure minority rights for themselves from a vindictive Republican majority. For shame.
-- Todd/Leviathn
-
They should make a law whereby the deadlines are extended by the exact same length of time as they are unable to convene the House due to the no-shows. It would make stunts like this useless.
-
At least our taxes aren't getting raised.
-
Originally posted by Sandman_SBM
Sounds like they need a new set of rules at the Texas House.
You get the government you deserve, cowboys.
FU tofu boy
We GOT the goverment we "deserved" I guess when Clinton was in office did we?
And I suppose you will also say we are GETTING the goverment we "deserve" with Bush in office?
FU again in case you missed it the first time.
Smoke another one ignorant brain dead boy
IMHO the Democrats are sh*t birds no matter what the state. Just in your case both the Dem and Reps are sh*t birds.
-
Originally posted by Drunky
FU tofu boy
We GOT the goverment we "deserved" I guess when Clinton was in office did we?
And I suppose you will also say we are GETTING the goverment we "deserve" with Bush in office?
FU again in case you missed it the first time.
Smoke another one ignorant brain dead boy
YHBT... YHL... HAND...
-
Ouch. :eek:
I would edit that Sandman, before Skuzzy sees it!
-
Originally posted by Sandman_SBM
YHBT... YHL... HAND...
I think the Dem's in Texas (yes, I'm Texan) deserve to be arrested. They are pretty spineless to "disappear". That is my call.
What I don't like is that fact the someone from California who didn't vote in Texas is saying that I DESERVE my representitives. Especially when I voted Republican.
So once again...a big FU to sandman...better check your backyard there sandman.
A joke while I was stationed in CA ya bastage...How can you tell the difference between a democrate and republican in california? You can't.
Oh and btw...LSDJ...OKEK...ASD:KL....OKE,MW...JHSOJDHJD
.OSKDKDS.OSLDM,OP....OOMSDKDSJDSOFYHWEOHAL. SDNOLDSHLSDNFHSD
S
ANLSDHSODIFJSD
FJSDLFKJSLDFKNSGPJGPJM
O
'O
OJDGHSDGLHSDNG
-
Do any of you even know WHY the Dem's walked? The Ultra-Right Republicans are attempting to limit Medical Malpractice Suits at some rediculously low amount ($100,000 I belive, may be wrong).
This is WONDERFUL you say? Wait until a member of your family is horribly killed or permenantly disabled by some quack and you have to pay for a lifetime of expences. It's a bad bill and they don't have the votes to overturn. WOO HOO VOTE REPUBLICAN, We'll make sure the rich stay that way.
-
thats 100 000 on punitive damages and doesnt effect an overall claim. Some Doctors here in NE staged a "walk out" refusing to do complicated procedures or surgery at all until the florida house passes a law to limit punitive damages to 250k.
Punitive damages are just a part of a malpractice suit. Suppose doctors stopped doing certain high risk procedures because they fear being slammed with outrageous punitive damages? The main drive, as reported here, for doctors settling some of the frivilous malpractice suits are fear of punitive damages.
You are trying to paint some biased picture of evil republicans denying rights to patients who were mal treated by their doctor. Thats not true at all.
-
NM
-
Originally posted by rpm371
This is WONDERFUL you say? Wait until a member of your family is horribly killed or permenantly disabled by some quack and you have to pay for a lifetime of expences. It's a bad bill and they don't have the votes to overturn. WOO HOO VOTE REPUBLICAN, We'll make sure the rich stay that way.
It's not a matter of policy or even party. The Democrats acted in a willfully illegal manner in an attempt to thwart the democratic process. Why make rules governing procedure if one party chooses to simply ignore them when they see fit? The entire ordeal undermines the legislature and makes a mockery of the Texas state house.
Unless, y'know, you actually thought the caning of Charles Sumner was a good way to resolve legislative disputes.
Fight the fight, but fight it within the rules. If the Democrats feel so locked out of the process that they must resort to extra-legal manuevers, then they should ask themselves why they shaped the rules in such a way when they were in the majority so as to totally marginalize themselves now that they're the minority.
-- Todd/Leviathn
-
I was wrong on the amount.
"In addition, C.S.H.B. 4 addresses the health care crisis by including the following proposals:
_A $250,000 cap on non-economic damages to be applied on a per-defendant basis.
_Clarifies that allegation of certain criminal conduct is insufficient to lift the limitations on the award of punitive damages.
_Allows the supreme court on motion of any party to assign a more specialized judge to a health care liability claim.
_Other substantive, procedural and technical changes."
That also includes wrongful death. i.e. A Doctor makes the error of giving your child the wrong blood. The mistake is not corrected and the child dies. You can sue for the medical expences incurred (pay the Doctor Bill)and $250,000, unless the Doctor's net worth is less than $500,000, in which case you can sue for 1/2. THATS ALL! It's a bad bill, and yes it was written by a Republican.
-
Originally posted by rpm371
THATS ALL! It's a bad bill, and yes it was written by a Republican.
God forbid a Democrat should ever write a bad bill. In the unlikely event it should ever happen, let's hope the Texas Republicans don't go running for the hills.
In any event, from what I've been reading, the walkout was partially in response to a Republican redistricting plan that the Democrats vehemently opposed.
Link: http://www.msnbc.com/news/912803.asp?0dm=C23IN
-- Todd/Leviathn
-
Originally posted by funkedup
What bull****. Canadians are even funnier.
show me were I said different. We are better at laughing at our selves though.
-
If it was a bad Democratic Bill, I'd be against it ,too. Bad laws are bad laws, no matter who writes them. This one happens to be Republican Sponsored.
-
RPM apparently you have absolutely NO clue about medical malpractice insurance and the current practice climate in many states, including my own. As a medical professional, I am and you would be amazed (maybe not) at how many lawsuits are filed for even the most asinine of reasons. These lawsuits require the doctor/insurance to spend time and money towards these as well as legitimate cases. Even a case that is dismissed will usually cost over $50k. Most lawsuits don't even take place for years, hoping the doctors/insurance will just settle for a high dollar amount as opposed to paying escalating fees while the plaintiff builds their case leisurely. All this in turn creates higher malpractice insurance rates for doctors, here they were raised 40 to 100% depending on specialty. Many were forced to abandon their practices to find work in a friendlier setting. Many OB/GYN doctors in my area are limited to <100 deliveries a year or face HUGE increases in MPI. The Trauma Center I work at shut down last year for a couple of weeks because the Trauma Surgeons and Ortho Surgeons walked out in protest. Ours is one of the busiest trauma centers in the US. Care to guess what happened when it was closed? Think about the quality of care you will receive from the medical professionals who are left when most have moved due to these high rates. While I agree those in my profession should be held accountable for their errors, most errors are created due to problems in the process. Sure he cut off the wrong leg, but how many errors had to happen leading up to that? The heart transplant on that unfortunate girl at Duke was a grave error, but many factors contributed to it. Would she have lived without the heroic efforts, no. Would she have rejected a proper organ anyways, probably. At least she was given a chance. Should the doctor be held liable for this tragedy? What about all the others involved. I'm rambling and it's late. What I'm trying to say is LOOK AT THE BIG PICTURE and don't focus on money alone.
-
You're a medical professional, Fuzzy? Can I ask you a question? What is it with you people and (such as prescriptions) making things so damn difficult to read?!! :D Paragraph breaks!
-
Fuzzy, I know all too well about Medical Malpractice. My daughter was unfortunate enough to be treated by a quack and had PERMANENT injuries as a result. It was a long ugly battle and we did not win due to a technicality.
Texas has a major problem with malpractice, partially due to the size of the state. A major factor is the State Medical Board. A Dallas TV Station recently did an expose on the number of doctors practicing with questionable backgrounds and history of malpractice cases. If you let them return to work, is it not logical they will continue to make serious mistakes? Those Doctors are driving up the States rates. If you get several tickets, does that not drive up your car insurance? Good Doctors equal lower rates, but I conceed there are those frivalous lawsuits that will occur. A court will throw those out in most instances.
What needs reform is Malpractice Insurance. There is no way you can tell me the Insurance Companies are not making HUGE profits. They are the MAIN problem with healthcare in the US today. I agree it is wrong for Trauma Centers to be forced to close. But there is no way that ALL Trauma Centers will close in an area.
For Instance, In Tarrant County, Tx a major hospital announced it would stop delivering babies. Result? 3 other hospitals in the county increased their newborns. Where there is a demand there will be Doctors that will treat patients.
My own personal physician will treat me at a lower cost if I pay cash rather that filing an insurance claim. Less paperwork for his office to handle. Insurance Companies are the problem, reforming tort is not the answer.
-
Lawsuit abuse in texas is incredible, I haven't seen anything like it in any other state . I've never been anywhere else that had so many amublance chasing lawyer commercials .
Criminal behavior to circumvent the democratic proccess and impose one's will. That's almost the definition of the T word, almost .
-
rpm - whatever the reason
they - the handsomehunkcrats - need to stay and fight for those who voted them into office. you think them heroes for hiding?
while ur at it-yes, I think the malpractice needs limits. lawyers have made it so dang expensive for docs to get coverage it is ridiculous. we all pay high med costs so their arse is covered when what - 1 in 1000, 1 in 10,000, 1 in 100,000, 1 in 1,000,000 -whatever the numbers are, medical mistakes happen?
when/if the dem gov runs the med show, you don't think these same dems will be screamin for the same limits to protect "their" docs?
-
Lawsuit abuse in texas is incredible, I haven't seen anything like it in any other state .
Offhand I know that West Virginia and Pennsylvania have the same problem. Doctors are leaving those states in droves because of the cost of malpractice insurance.
ra
-
Man... I am liking Texas more and more... decent gun laws, decent automobile laws and now... they want to limit new taxes and have spending cuts? sounds great... limit lawsuits? yeah... some state has to start it. We will have to do it eventually... I can't see how all medical bills paid for life and 250 grand is not fair.
might retire to Texas... is corpus cristi nice?
lazs
-
Originally posted by rpm371
Fuzzy, I know all too well about Medical Malpractice. My daughter was unfortunate enough to be treated by a quack and had PERMANENT injuries as a result. It was a long ugly battle and we did not win due to a technicality.
Texas has a major problem with malpractice, partially due to the size of the state. A major factor is the State Medical Board. A Dallas TV Station recently did an expose on the number of doctors practicing with questionable backgrounds and history of malpractice cases. If you let them return to work, is it not logical they will continue to make serious mistakes? Those Doctors are driving up the States rates. If you get several tickets, does that not drive up your car insurance? Good Doctors equal lower rates, but I conceed there are those frivalous lawsuits that will occur. A court will throw those out in most instances.
What needs reform is Malpractice Insurance. There is no way you can tell me the Insurance Companies are not making HUGE profits. They are the MAIN problem with healthcare in the US today. I agree it is wrong for Trauma Centers to be forced to close. But there is no way that ALL Trauma Centers will close in an area.
For Instance, In Tarrant County, Tx a major hospital announced it would stop delivering babies. Result? 3 other hospitals in the county increased their newborns. Where there is a demand there will be Doctors that will treat patients.
My own personal physician will treat me at a lower cost if I pay cash rather that filing an insurance claim. Less paperwork for his office to handle. Insurance Companies are the problem, reforming tort is not the answer.
What makes him a quack? Because he made a mistake. Everyone makes mistakes, only people get hurt when doctors do. That doesn't make them "quacks", it makes them human.
Malpractice rates aren't only because of insurance companies. They are a business. They can't just keep a set rate. They must make a profit. If morons sue for rediculous reasons and for rediculous amounts. Boohoo. Your daughter has a permanant scar on her little toe. That hardly entitles you to 100 mil. Even if the doctor had made a mistake.
Regardless, what the legislators did was wrong and illegal. If you can't play be the rules set by the people of this country, then don't be in the house. I hope they lock them up.
-
The more I think about this the more I realize how funny/stupid it is .
"This sucks, what should we do?"
"RUN AWAY!! HIDE!!"
"IF WE DON'T DEBATE, WE CAN NEVER BE WRONG"
"THEY CAN'T GET US IN OKLAHOMA"
"GOOD IDEA!!
Idiots, this is something right out of a Monty Python sketch.
-
Here is irony, these people, the ones who ran away and are hiding out, are paid soley for their judicious reasoning skills .
Yet these same people are in favor of very stiff penalties and consequences for incompetence in the work place.
I would encourage anybody who elected these fools to sue them for malpractice .
-
RPM, that is hardly an ultra-right proposition, though the commercials and lobby would have you believe it so.
Hell I believe even California has award limits.
-
Fatty is right
California does have limits.
It has been awhile, but my mom was looking to sue, she had three back surgeries, do to a ruptured disk, when her insurance changed she had to get a new doc, and it turns out the first doc ****ed up and fused the vertebrae wrong in two out of the three cases.
My mom can barely walk, and is now, on her 12th surgery, she takes morphine every day as part of her normal prescriptions!
we tried to get a lawyer, and every ****ing one of the godamn dirty bastards told us to go away, it was not worth their time cause gee guess what, you can only get like 200k in cali for punitive damages! NOT ONE LAWYER WOULD talk to her.
We even had the word of the new surgeon, that he would testify!! I think it is pretty rare for one surgeon to testify against another, but he was shocked at how bad a job this other doc had done...
so where does this leave my mom? On permanent disability, using a wheel chair most of the time and in pain 100% of her day.
What do I think of that law? Part of me says it is a good thing, that most doctors need protection from *******s trying to get over on the system...
It did make me despise lawyers though, 200k would have been enough for my for my mom to live on if invested well.... but not worth the time.........
Yes I am bitter about this..
I bet it was not the republicans in California who got the law in place here.
Oh and for you jerkoffs who say we wouldn't complain if the Republicans did this? You are wrong, they are pulling a BS stunt and wrong is wrong, don't push your low standards on me!
-
Suave,
The term you want is malfeasance in office, not malpractice. I understand what you were saying.
GTO,
Sorry about your Mom. I think you should contact the state bar assn. for your state. The attorney is supposed to represent their clients interest, not their own pocket book. Your case demostrates one of the things wrong with our legal system in that lawyers are a major part of the problem, not the solution.
I'll never foget one of the lectures I had when I was in college in with a Law Enf. major. The lecturer, a lawyer, said that the purpose of a trial is NOT to find truth or demonstrate the truth. He said the "truth" would find its way into the trial rather than being brought in by one side or the other. He also said lawyers had NO responsibility to defend truth in trial. :mad: As a rather naive youngster that got me rather riled up at the system. I thought he was a damned liar just hosing Law Enf. students out of spite in his, for those students, a mandatory class. Later, after being in several trials and watching both defence and prosecutors at work I realised he was right. A sad situation indeed.
I am a staunch supporter of tort reform. Yep I have been sued and sued others as well including the situation that gave me my disability. Do I think I deserved more money, sure but it wouldn't have been necessarily fair. I have seen companies fail in the aviation industry out of FEAR or suits. I have seen a Euro company REFUSE to sell to the US because of the impact of a POSSIBLE suit on them. Until we get a reasonable and rational (huh, what is that anyhow???? :confused: ) solution costs for just about EVERYTHING is going up due to legal costs and insurance fees.
Yep the insurance industry is there to make a profit. If there was no profit they wouldn't be in the business. They have stockholders to account to and they WANT a return on their investment, They are not charities.
A result of insurance interests is very prevalent in the aviation industry right now. Most insurers have dropped out of writing avuation insurance. There are less than 10 now in the industry. Competition is almost nonexistant and it is getting prohibitavely expensive to insure a small plane. Insurance is going to be a MAJOR cause of the collapse of aviation if this does not change. When you cannot insure a plane, the value of the plane drops dramatically as no one will want to buy it. I found this year, only 2 companies would offer a policy on my plane and I have NEVER had a claim in aviation in 20 years.
When FBO's and others in the industry got hit with premiums that doubled at best and went up in multiples of 100 at worst they shut down. New pilots are not being trained. Older pilots have a hard time getting recurrent training or advanced licenses. No training planes means less business for manufacturers whrich means less planes all around and fewer jobs and it all spirals down.
Think about it, tort reform is NOT about keeping rich folks rich. It's about keeping choices open and costs down for everyone including the poor. Remember people are not FORCED to become health care providers. They can go elsewhere to make a living. The same exists for teachers and others in all public service organizations.
-
Originally posted by rpm371
Do any of you even know WHY the Dem's walked? The Ultra-Right Republicans are attempting to limit Medical Malpractice Suits at some rediculously low amount ($100,000 I belive, may be wrong).
This is WONDERFUL you say? Wait until a member of your family is horribly killed or permenantly disabled by some quack and you have to pay for a lifetime of expences. It's a bad bill and they don't have the votes to overturn. WOO HOO VOTE REPUBLICAN, We'll make sure the rich stay that way.
You should get your facts straight before posting lies....nice try.
BTW....what qualifies you to grade this bill good or bad....are you a physician, work for an insurance company or an attorney? Is this just your uneducated personal opinion?
Insurance Companies are the problem, reforming tort is not the answer.
The above statement is as wrong as wrong could be....oh well, I don't know why I respond to these threads any longer...your answer to this will only prolong the ignorance.
-
Originally posted by Sandman_SBM
I think the two party system sucks, but I'd really like to see what kind of "government" would come out of Texas without the dems involved. I'm sure it would be great fun to watch from the outside.
We could take a pool to determine just how long before we would get to see fences and armed guards at the NM, OK, AR, and LA borders. :D
Considering the 40,000 ILLEGAL aliens flooding into the country and bankrupting the medical systems of these states, and consequently raising medical cost for all of us.
I'd say not soon enough.
-
Malpractice insurance for an Ob/Gyn in the state of Massachusetts is $85,000 a year.
-
Originally posted by JBA
Malpractice insurance for an Ob/Gyn in the state of Massachusetts is $85,000 a year.
Yeah, but you get to look at all those nekkid women.
-
Originally posted by GtoRA2
I bet it was not the republicans in California who got the law in place here.
That law was passed in 1975, I'm not sure who controlled the legislature, the governor was either Reagan or Brown.
Bush now wants to take this bad law nation-wide. If you want to be educated on the issue, check:
http://www.ftcr.org/healthcare/medmal.php
-
The tort reform legislation is NOT the reason they pulled this stunt. The "Chicken D's" left the state because of the redistricting legislation that was to be debated yesterday. They are walking out on thier constitutional duty to this state and this nation. The best part is that these are the rules that THEY made in thier century long control of the Texas legislature. The same rules they used over the Republicans for 100+ years. Somehow those rules shouldn't aply now though :rolleyes:
The democrat party has nothing left. No ideas, nothing but obstruction. They are (and have been for many many years) all smoke and mirrors.
-
Montezuma
The law effected my life in a horible way, but it is a good law. the problem is the scumbag lawyers who would not take the case because the amount was too low and their cut would not be big enough.
I am not greedy nor is my mom, she could have lived fine on the 200k. She is living on FAR FAR less now, with disability and Socail security, and the limited work she can do from home.
-
Originally posted by Udie
The democrat party has nothing left. No ideas, nothing but obstruction. They are (and have been for many many years) all smoke and mirrors.
This reminds me of a comment that Lyndon Johnson made in private to, I think, Senate Majority Leader Mansfield back in 1964. I paraphrase:
"We'd actually be in trouble if the Republicans were for something instead of just against everything."
Ironic that the shoe's on the other foot in many ways. It's not even that Democrats don't have ideas, but they seem utterly incapable of either elucidating them or distinguishing them from Republican positions. They appear unable to set any sort of national agenda, allowing the Republicans instead to consistently choose winning issues that require Democratic obstruction.
-- Todd/Leviathn
-
Originally posted by Dead Man Flying
This reminds me of a comment that Lyndon Johnson made in private to, I think, Senate Majority Leader Mansfield back in 1964. I paraphrase:
"We'd actually be in trouble if the Republicans were for something instead of just against everything."
Ironic that the shoe's on the other foot in many ways. It's not even that Democrats don't have ideas, but they seem utterly incapable of either elucidating them or distinguishing them from Republican positions. They appear unable to set any sort of national agenda, allowing the Republicans instead to consistently choose winning issues that require Democratic obstruction.
-- Todd/Leviathn
yeah that's what I said :D
-
Ones been arrested :
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,86773,00.html
This is some funny chit! She asks to drive herself, trooper says "NOPE!" and cuffs her.
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
Ones been arrested :
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,86773,00.html
This is some funny chit! She asks to drive herself, trooper says "NOPE!" and cuffs her.
HEHE they're locked down at the capital too, I don't think she can leave until this is settled :D Now I hope it lasts a bit longer :D They only need to capture a few more and we have the quarum needed to debate and vote.
One side note to how dishonest dems are.... 12 of them told the speaker of the house that they would NOT be absent and would be there to debate and vote. I think 1 or 2 actually showed up to them for keeping thier word. The rest are scum bags and should be deported to france.....
-
Originally posted by Martlet
What makes him a quack? Because he made a mistake. Boohoo. Your daughter has a permanant scar on her little toe. That hardly entitles you to 100 mil. Even if the doctor had made a mistake.
What makes him a quack? He failed to recognise a SEVERE problem in an overdue pregnancy. He failed to run several tests that would have pointed out the problem several weeks earlier. My wife was 3 weeks overdue and he showed no signs of concern and told us everything was normal. A visiting MD spotted it immediately and ordered emergency surgery.
The scar on her little toe? Permanent Brain damage resulting in her having 4 very painful surgeries before her 3rd birthday. All of them paid in full by me, no insurance. Insurance refused to cover her. She died by an unrelated incident 1 week before her 3rd birthday.
Did I sue? You bet your a** I did. I was not looking for a windfall, I was looking for justice. When it's your children that are involved you will see things in a different light.
-
Then file a criminal complaint.
-
Sorry for your loss,
But there is no justice in money.
suing him prolly didn't even stop his practice.
-
Originally posted by rpm371
What makes him a quack? He failed to recognise a SEVERE problem in an overdue pregnancy. He failed to run several tests that would have pointed out the problem several weeks earlier. My wife was 3 weeks overdue and he showed no signs of concern and told us everything was normal. A visiting MD spotted it immediately and ordered emergency surgery.
The scar on her little toe? Permanent Brain damage resulting in her having 4 very painful surgeries before her 3rd birthday. All of them paid in full by me, no insurance. Insurance refused to cover her. She died by an unrelated incident 1 week before her 3rd birthday.
Did I sue? You bet your a** I did. I was not looking for a windfall, I was looking for justice. When it's your children that are involved you will see things in a different light.
As I said, it doesn't make him a quack. He made a mistake. How many lives has he saved? My sister was 3 weeks overdue, and delivered a healthy baby girl. While I am sorry for your loss, and have no information to say whether he was at fault one way or another, I hardly think that puts him into the "quack" category.
-
Isn't everyone missing the point here? All this talk of the Democrats messing with the democratic process when it seems to me that it's the Republicans who are attempting to usurp democratic process by redrawing all the district boundaries in such a way as to ensure a continuing and bigger Republican majority?
Or have I missed something. Is this not the biggest anti-democratic and anti Democratic party issue.
One party trying to rig the election process in it's favour and simulaneously disenfranshise a major part of the electorate?
They call that process Gerry Mandering don't they after the Northern Irish politician who redrew election boundaries to ensure his party always won the election by a landslide.
In effect a coup!
-
Isn't everyone missing the point here? All this talk of the Democrats messing with the democratic process when it seems to me that it's the Republicans who are attempting to usurp democratic process by redrawing all the district boundaries in such a way as to ensure a continuing and bigger Republican majority?
Gerrymandering is the privelige of the majority party, it's completely legal. The Democrats did it for 100 years in Texas, now it's the Republicans turn. That's why the Dems amscrayed.
ra
-
wrong, to a certain degree. Dems controlled it for 130 years or so. They gerrymandered this state bigtime. You should see the way the lines are drawn now.
That's beside the point anyway. The republicans are going about it exactly as they should and by the constitution. When it passes into law it still need judicial review here in Tx. The dems are all partying in Ok at a Holiday Inn and Denny's. They are NOT fufilling thier constitutional duties....
Please God PLEASE let us find out they did this on state money and not their own nickel......
-
Ok that makes sense, assuming the Republicans re-draw the boundaries to reflect the actual division of voters in TX. Rather than the way they wish it so.
Can we rely on them to be fair?