I can see that. Remind me to never go to a rural hospital!
There's another aspect I didn't mention: the police can get really abusive in their requests. The hospital staff is supposed to direct any and all police requests to a designated person to handle. My wife was that person for a year or so, and often came off her shift with stories about some cop or another who was literally screaming in her face in an attempt to coerce her into giving in to his demands.
Ah, that could be. My comments are based on my wife's experience working in a major metropolitan hospital.
She says that every single day, the police come in and try to talk nurses and doctors into things that are technically allowed for the police but not for health care providers. These are usually requests for medical records, but often are requests for invasive searches.
The hospital staff almost always refuses to go along for the reasons I said above. The hospital itself is so concerned about liability that on the rare occasions that a doctor or nurse gives in to police demands, they are fired. From the hospital's point of view, this is a potentially existential issue.
Good faith doesn't apply so easily to doctors, though. Doctors have actual procedures they need to follow even if they have a good faith belief that the procedures aren't necessary.
Based on the description of what the doctor did (which may not be complete), no such procedure was followed. If a patient comes in for an X-ray and the doctor performs an invasive procedure without proper consent, "good faith" does not protect the doctor. Doctors have been convicted of battery for such things.
There is an exception for when a patient is unresponsive and is in imminent danger of death, but that clearly was not the case here.
I think this was the Supreme Court, not Congress. And it seems to me that the SC rulings about patents over time has been pretty 50/50 (although I could be misremembering). So at least things aren't getting worse there.
Yes, my experiences are similar. The fish rots from the head, and the "head" is the company (or police department) itself. I've even worked at non-unionized places where the employees were treated decently in every way, and there was no appetite to have a union at all.
Unions are employees acting in concert to try to balance the inherent power discrepancy with employers. That's a vital function.
But still, that doesn't excuse any actual misbehavior on the part of unions.
You are making very specific accusations. Can you support them?
Doing so is important because -- as much as a distrust the justice system -- the results of a court case carries a lot more weight than the unsupported comments of a stranger on the internet.
But it needs to be said every time. The absolute worst time to implement new law or change existing law is right after a major disaster, when people are still more emotional than thoughtful.
I am occasionally interviewed on radio shows and podcasts, and all of them went fine for me except for the last one I did (about a year ago).
While that was not comparable to this one in the sense that the host was not only supportive of me, he did his level best to make me sound good. The problem was me -- I was ill, and my brain was not really firing on all cylinders. Also, I'd had a bit too much caffeine.
The end result was that I sounded like a hyperactive idiot.
It was so bad that I never told anyone about it, not even my friends. But you know what never occurred to me to do?
Ask that it be taken down.
Ms. Boring, a word of advice: bad interviews happen. When they do, the best thing you can possibly do is just let it go. If you're worried about PR, then do another interview with someone who is "on your side" and publicize the hell out of that.
1) Right now, if a gun manufacturer produces a weapon that is actually defective in some way that causes death or injury, they do have (and should have) liability for that.
2) Additional safety standards (as with cars) seem like a good idea -- but it's wrong and dangerous to try to legally hold manufacturers to standards that don't yet actually exist. First things first.
I'm not sure how what you're saying means that he "did us all over". It's not like this has distracted us from the many other aspects of this -- especially the one you point out. Can you explain?
"If you mean that this event was somehow organised, funded, prepared or facilitated by the terrorist group then no it wasn't."
Yes, this is precisely what "ties" means. Someone just being sympathetic and acting independently (and I'm not convinced that's what happened here) is not having "ties".
On the post: Customs Agents, Local Doctor Subject 18-Year-Old To Vaginal, Rectal Probing In Search Of Nonexistent Drugs
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Presumption of innocence had a good run
On the post: Customs Agents, Local Doctor Subject 18-Year-Old To Vaginal, Rectal Probing In Search Of Nonexistent Drugs
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Can this incident be cited...
There's another aspect I didn't mention: the police can get really abusive in their requests. The hospital staff is supposed to direct any and all police requests to a designated person to handle. My wife was that person for a year or so, and often came off her shift with stories about some cop or another who was literally screaming in her face in an attempt to coerce her into giving in to his demands.
On the post: Customs Agents, Local Doctor Subject 18-Year-Old To Vaginal, Rectal Probing In Search Of Nonexistent Drugs
Re: Re: Re: Can this incident be cited...
She says that every single day, the police come in and try to talk nurses and doctors into things that are technically allowed for the police but not for health care providers. These are usually requests for medical records, but often are requests for invasive searches.
The hospital staff almost always refuses to go along for the reasons I said above. The hospital itself is so concerned about liability that on the rare occasions that a doctor or nurse gives in to police demands, they are fired. From the hospital's point of view, this is a potentially existential issue.
On the post: NY Legislature Rushes Anti-Airbnb Legislation; Likely In Violation Of Federal Law
Re: Re: Re: Re: Silver lining?
On the post: Supreme Court Knocks A Little More Off The 4th Amendment; Gives Cops Another Way To Salvage Illegal Searches
Re: Re: We've been there a while
On the post: Customs Agents, Local Doctor Subject 18-Year-Old To Vaginal, Rectal Probing In Search Of Nonexistent Drugs
Re: Re: Can this incident be cited...
On the post: Customs Agents, Local Doctor Subject 18-Year-Old To Vaginal, Rectal Probing In Search Of Nonexistent Drugs
Re: Re: Presumption of innocence had a good run
On the post: Customs Agents, Local Doctor Subject 18-Year-Old To Vaginal, Rectal Probing In Search Of Nonexistent Drugs
Re: Re: I hope she gets a huge settlement
On the post: Customs Agents, Local Doctor Subject 18-Year-Old To Vaginal, Rectal Probing In Search Of Nonexistent Drugs
Re: Can this incident be cited...
Based on the description of what the doctor did (which may not be complete), no such procedure was followed. If a patient comes in for an X-ray and the doctor performs an invasive procedure without proper consent, "good faith" does not protect the doctor. Doctors have been convicted of battery for such things.
There is an exception for when a patient is unresponsive and is in imminent danger of death, but that clearly was not the case here.
On the post: Supreme Court Says, Yes, The Patent Office Can Review Crappy Patents Using Broad Standards
Re:
I'm pleased to see it, though.
On the post: Body Cam Footage Of Cop Hitting Handcuffed Man Leads To Firing Of Three New Orleans Police Officers
Re: Unions?
Unions are employees acting in concert to try to balance the inherent power discrepancy with employers. That's a vital function.
But still, that doesn't excuse any actual misbehavior on the part of unions.
On the post: DOJ Drops Stupid Drug Trafficking Charges Against FedEx After Judge Criticizes Its 'Novel Prosecution'
Re: FedEx Drug Trafficking
Doing so is important because -- as much as a distrust the justice system -- the results of a court case carries a lot more weight than the unsupported comments of a stranger on the internet.
On the post: Seeing Opportunity, Congress Tries To Rush Through Its Plan To Legalize FBI Abuses Citing 'Orlando!'
I hate that it needs to be said every time
On the post: Bitcoin Evangelist Has Podcast Go Bad, Threatens To Sue After It's Posted
My experience
While that was not comparable to this one in the sense that the host was not only supportive of me, he did his level best to make me sound good. The problem was me -- I was ill, and my brain was not really firing on all cylinders. Also, I'd had a bit too much caffeine.
The end result was that I sounded like a hyperactive idiot.
It was so bad that I never told anyone about it, not even my friends. But you know what never occurred to me to do?
Ask that it be taken down.
Ms. Boring, a word of advice: bad interviews happen. When they do, the best thing you can possibly do is just let it go. If you're worried about PR, then do another interview with someone who is "on your side" and publicize the hell out of that.
On the post: Customs Agents, Local Doctor Subject 18-Year-Old To Vaginal, Rectal Probing In Search Of Nonexistent Drugs
Re:
On the post: Customs Agents, Local Doctor Subject 18-Year-Old To Vaginal, Rectal Probing In Search Of Nonexistent Drugs
Re:
On the post: Customs Agents, Local Doctor Subject 18-Year-Old To Vaginal, Rectal Probing In Search Of Nonexistent Drugs
I hope she gets a huge settlement
On the post: Judge Doesn't Find Much To Like In 'Material Support For Terrorism' Lawsuit Against Twitter
Re: Re: Re: We don't jail car manufacturers...
1) Right now, if a gun manufacturer produces a weapon that is actually defective in some way that causes death or injury, they do have (and should have) liability for that.
2) Additional safety standards (as with cars) seem like a good idea -- but it's wrong and dangerous to try to legally hold manufacturers to standards that don't yet actually exist. First things first.
On the post: CIA Director John Brennan Says Non-US Encryption Is 'Theoretical'
Re:
On the post: DOJ Rushed To Link Orlando Shooter To ISIS, Now Plans To Redact What He Said During 911 Call For... Reasons
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Yes, this is precisely what "ties" means. Someone just being sympathetic and acting independently (and I'm not convinced that's what happened here) is not having "ties".
Next >>