500 Threads: Time for Blog Feedback
It appears that the thread on November 21 2007 "Your Medical Prescription: Who Gets to See It?" was the 500th thread I published on this blog since I started the blog almost 3 1/2 years ago. All threads cover different subjects or different aspects of the same general subject and all cover some aspect of the ethics within the practice of medicine, medical education and medical social issues. Virtually all,despite when the thread was published, are still meaningful for visitors and myself to comment upon. So if one thread is not quite what you wanted to read or write about, there are very likely a number of others available here. Pick one from the Archives.
I would like to designate this current posting as a site for general comments and suggestions from my visitors about this blog. I would like postings here that deal with what threads and features of this blog which the visitor felt was helpful and of value and should be continued and what threads or aspects of this blog which were inappropriate, inadequate, could be improved or not repeated along with constructive suggestions. So if you see anything here that you like or dislike or think could be improved, write your comments here.
Thanks to all my visitors who have come and have participated. It is not just my words that I write that make this blog valuable but it is the comments that my visitors write on topics from circumcision to patient modesty amongst many, many others that help to inform and educate all of us--including me! ..Maurice.
posted by Maurice Bernstein, M.D. @ 6:13:00 PM
53 comments
53 Comments:
Congratulations Maurice! You have done a great job bringing up some great topics. I am jealous of how much attention your comments sections get.
Keep up the good work. No comments on content, but if you wanted to do some site redesign, I would be happy to give some pointers that I have learned reworking Pallimed this year.
Christian, thanks for the kind words. Rather than simply communicating with me privately by e-mail, maybe you could provide, by posting here on this thread, your experience and suggestions. Perhaps it will be of value to some of my visitors who are bloggers also.
By the way, I would like to point out one element of my blog format that seems to be unique compared with other medical blogs..and that is the absence of medical or other advertisements. My goal for the blog is to povide a space for education and discussion of medical ethics issues but free of commercials since I think that display of ads implies the blogger is interested to a degree in using the blog as a source of income, distracting the true intent of the blog. Some may think that this view is a prudish one. In this regard..well, then I am. ..Maurice.
The modesty and nudity threads have been real popular, but they have gotten so big that they are hard to read or post to. I tried posting a message and the server acted like it timed out on me. Maybe you could extract some of the more common thoughts expressed in these two threads and start two new ones. Just a suggestion.
This is the best site that I have seen for discussing medical issues.
MJ KC, thanks for your compliment and your suggestion. I think generally both of the threads you identified are functioning satisfactorily but if you are having trouble please let me know with details. Write directly to me e-mail at DoktorMo@aol.com
I am worried that starting two new threads on the same subjects will cause a loss of continuity and further I am not sure I can fairly extract postings that are common thoughts from the old threads to the new ones. I would say that all postings are worthy of scanning through. One can also use the "find on this page" function of the web browser to find specific topic words amongst all the postings, if such a search is desired.
Again, thanks. ..Maurice.
Generally speaking, I find this blog to be excellent: thought-provoking, challenging, and mostly balanced. In some cases, however, laypeople's thoughts on an issue have been dismissed on this blog because they are laypeople, notably in the modesty thread. I would like to see this practice discontinued -- if we are wrong about something, please enlighten us rather than dismissing us.
Please feel free to keep this comment private if you would prefer not to share criticism -- I can certainly understand that.
--PG
PG, first of all, this thread was set up to provide a source of constructive criticism as well as appropriate approval regarding the way the blog itself is functioning, therefore your comment shouldn't be kept private. Sharing criticism is my goal for this thread.
Secondly, I would want to understand why you find why you came to the conclusion that "laypeople's thoughts on an issue have been dismissed on this blog because they are laypeople, notably in the modesty thread."
For example, with over 600 responses to the Modesty thread and most of them NOT mine and with my own advice written there with the suggestion for those who want their voices heard beyond this blog to join together and form an activist group, I can hardly say that I am dismissing my visitors, laypeople or professionals (such as js md).
On my thread on infant male circumcision, I wrote nothing to dismiss lay visitors except to warn the writers against the obvious non-civil and ad hominem remarks that were being written there. Like the modesty issue, the profound concerns about circumcision that was written there was really new to me and I was learning by reading the postings there.
So, again, if you find that I am dismissing the lay visitors, please help me by being specific regarding my behavior. That is the whole purpose of this thread. Thanks PG for starting this conversation. ..Maurice.
Okay, Fair enough. There were a number of instances where patients raised feeling violated or even wondering what the heck was going on, or even not knowing something had happened to them (in the thread about operating theatres) where your response was "but that is normal/okay/up to the doctor" (and I know I hsould have written the comment numbers down, but I forgot to -- there was Kim whose husband had a colonoscopy go bad, and Kelly, whose email you posted, and an anonymous with crohn's from memory).
Rather than respond in that way, I would have preferred to see a deeper explanation of why those things were "normal/okay/up to the doctor". I hope this clarifies my position.
I didn't read the circumcision thread (before my time), but I am certainly glad to hear ad hominem attacks are not allowed on this blog.
Again, thank you for a thought provoking blog
-- PG
You have immense experience with the blogs and so I hesitate to suggest anything. But I do think comment moderation decreases the spontaneity of the blog substantially. I have not had any problem yet on my blog, but you can always delete inappropriate comments if necessary. And if a discussion gets out of hand, you can always re-enable comment moderation or delete the topic.
In the meantime, when discussion pauses for a few days, one never knows whether you're gone or just that there's no activity.
Having said that though, there are no better blogs on similar topics around.
To Joel and everyone else: if there apprears any diminution in the frequency of posting it is not that I am not allowing posting. I rarely get a spam posting or a posting bearing one line of text and not contributory to the discussion which will lead to my denial of a posting. Reduced appearances of postings is a reflection only of reduced posting by my visitors. I encourage each and every visitor to post their views on every topic.. otherwise how can the title of my blog be meaningful: Bioethics DISCUSSION Blog. ..Maurice.
I have discovered that I am not being notified by e-mail from blogger.com promptly (and an occasionally not at all)when a visitor writes to my blog. I have been dependent on receiving the e-mail to initiate the approval of the posting. This could account for delay in posting. I will be checking the moderator function of the blog more often to avoid further delays. ..Maurice.
A passing thought Dr. B. Your modesty blog has become so long that it is now slow loading and difficult to maneuver around.
Why not start Modesty Part 2 with a link to part one?
js md, I think your suggestion is a good one. Also, if the 2nd volume is near the front end of the blog, visitors might incidentially visit it who might not have come directly to the thread. ..Maurice.
it is disturbing when we saw a urologist and the discussion of respecting a patient privacy and modesty was addressed. Our concern and upset over being lied to about a surgical skin prep was discussed briefly and we stated how upsetting it was for us, the urologoist laughed. Needless to say we dropped the doctor.
Please write comments regarding the specific topics on the threads to the individual threads themselves and not to this thread which deals with general and specifc suggestions for improving this blog. This will help in maintaing continuity. ..Maurice.
I hope this pertains to this blog, but in the future do you think you will have a blog regarding the cost of medical care, testing, etc.. and having to put off the necessary medical care because the expense got to be too much?
Anonymous from today 1-15-2008: Yes, the cost of medical care today both in the United States and in countries around the world has many ethical issues associated with it and much has to do with justice--should there be equality of medical care despite great differences in personal incomes?Are drug prices so high that some patients have, themselves, to limit the dosages in order to afford other essentials such as food?
I look forward to one or more of my visitors to this Bioethics Discussion Blog to write the introduction for a new thread on the ethical concerns regarding the costs of medical care perhaps with some links to appropriate references or resources. I will then start the thread with that introduction.
Personally, I don't think that every thread has to be started by only me. Starting discussion of an issue is often more meaningful by someone who has personally faced and attempted to deal with it. ..Maurice.
p.s.- If you have an introduction to the topic, please write it to me by e-mail rather than posting it here. My e-mail address is:
DoktorMo@aol.com
Hello Everyone,
I am a freshman at the University of South Florida and I am writing this blog for my paper that I need to write regarding my input on embryonic stem cell research. I need to write an argument about why I think that embryonic stem cell research should continue. One reason is because my people have been and can be cured by stem cells. Diabetes and certain cancers can be treated and can prolong many lives of ill people.
The one side that people disagree with is that according to their religion or even just their opinion, this research is killing human life. I agree that this is bad and that it is similar to abortion. However, when women get abortions, they fetus is just thrown away and not used at all while with an embryo, the cells can be used because they are in a new stage and can change to multiple cells. So I can understand how people are upset about this procedure, but just think of all the people who are going to prolong their lives by using these cells. So many new procedures are coming out where so many people can be saved.
So if anybody has any input to what I am writing my paper on, I would love to hear it. My argument is or this research to continue.
Thanks!
For those interested in reading and writing about physician modesty in terms of behavior and appearance, I created a new thread on the subject titled: Is Being A Modest Doctor a Virtue and a Benefit for Their Patients ..Maurice.
Dr B. I suggest you delete the posts which aren't being displayed from Modesty and one extra. Then move them to Volume 2. Then post your final message ending the modesty thread and directing everyone to volume 2 with the admonition that no further posts will be enabled to the original thread.
With luck, maybe blogger can tell you a simpler way of doing this.
Quote previous post - "A passing thought Dr. B. Your modesty blog has become so long that it is now slow loading and difficult to maneuver around.
Why not start Modesty Part 2 with a link to part one?"
I fully agree with this suggestion.
As a constant visitor to your site from Aussie - I have never actually posted before but certainly I'm a keen follower and reader of your contributions and reply's.
Sometimes it seems like several minutes before a page loads and it would be good if you could do domething about it.
Other than that the blog is great, the feedback is good and information very informative.
Cheers, and have a great day.
Actually, I do have a link to the original modesty blog. Unfortunately, the blogger program is preventing further postings on that thread and all the postings for the past year are gone from the Comment page, though as I explain at the bottom of the text page of the thread how to access all the comments, including for the past year, but only in the Comment posting window.
As far as the speed of a page loading, I have no control over that and it may have to do with the speed of your modem or DSL or intrinsic to your computer.
Thanks for the compliments. ..Maurice.
Please visit this website for information on how you can protect yourself
from becoming a victim of a Medical Error:
http://leapforpatientsafety.org/
By the way, I am fully in favor of all appropriate activism to attempt to reduce the incidence of preventable medical error in the diagnosis and treatment of patients. ..Maurice.
Hi Dr Bernstein,
I am one of your recent ICM students. I just started keeping a blog for our summer trip to India. We got a grant to do work with oral cancer in rural India and the organization that gave us the money asked us to keep a blog. Being inexperienced I remembered you had a blog and so I quickly looked through it. It looks great and keep up the great work. You can see our blog at globalimpactoralcancer.blogspot.com Take care
viveksap,thank you for the compliment and looking at your blog I think it is off to a very good start. I wish you and your team the best of luck and the best in results of your trip to India.
Unfortunately, you probably will never know how many people your education campaign will have saved from the terrible consequences of oral cancer. But, you know, I think even to save the life of one or two folks in India from cancer would make your trip and activities worth while. Yes, even one or two human lives saved.
Have a safe trip and on return a productive continuation of your medical studies and career. ..Maurice.
At Friday, June 27, 2008 4:53:00 PM, Anonymous said...
Dr. Bernstein, happy to see the missing
comments are back. However, can you PLEASE rename the A and B comments under the original name
of -- Patient Modesty: A More Significant Issue - Additional Comments "A" (and) "B".
This allows the grouping to appear as a block on a google search.
Actually, if the following
"Volumes" were also labeled the
same way -- Patient Modesty: A
More Significant Issue - Volume 2,
etc. (then) all your Patient Modesty blog chapters would appear as several continuous pages
when googled. I think this is important as I see more and more people referring to your
modesty blogs on other health and
medical sites. I'd like to see
that a phalanx of information hits anyone who comes looking for facts on this issue.
So how about it? Thanks.
- avram
I am concerned that if I change the titles at this "late date", all the published links will get screwed up, so to speak (though I haven't as yet tested this concern.) Also, I think that any visitor can get a full page of all the threads on patient modesty by typing "Patient Modesty" (with quotes) in the Search Blog field in the left upper corner. including the thread "Naked". Try it. But..let me know your experience with regard to Google and this issue. ..Maurice.
Forgot to thank you for letting me "vent" I think it's great that a Doctor has a blog like this, it is informative as so many of us have had bad experiences! Thanks again, hope I'm using this blog correctly ...not great @ computers!
GB wrote a commentary regarding a medical mistake inflicted by the patient's surgeons. I posted it on a thread more appropriate to the topic than this one. ..Maurice.
Hi Maurice:
On the Killing vs. Letting Die thread of June 2007, I was surprised you did not "jump in" when Carol L. commented that "euthanasia is not only done but condoned" in referring to certain Palliative treatments. Many palliative treatments -the intention of which is to "relieve" suffering, and not to kill, may indeed precipitate death as a secondary effect. They are only administered as a last resort if considered effective to alleviate physical pain or extremephysical discomfort. Unlike euthanasia, the drug is not administered with the intent to kill. It is a "subtle" but important difference. On a case I reviewed recently, a doctor chose to administer a heavy dose of potassium chloride in lieu of morphine. While a higher dose of morphine may have hastened the patient's death, it was the continuation of a palliative treatment. Unlike this, potassium chloride had no pain-relieving purpose or effect other than the immediate killing of the sufferer!
It is a ine line, but an important one. Hospice does not kill their patients, it's against their mission.
sincerely, Aline
Aline, good point. Why don't you write about it on that thread. ..Maurice.
Although I have been reading your blogs for months, I was disappointed & hurt to find you do not publish all comments. The "Patient Modesty" blog has been of particular interest to me, and although I thought my views might be of interest to at least some of your readers, apparently I am either not articulate enough or intelligent enough to have my comments printed, or you do not really respect alternate views as you claim.
I publish all contributions except those which contribute nothing to the discussion but represent simply a commercial advertisement,those postings which persist in being uncivil in tone and words and those which are simply unrelated to the topic being discussed. In the latter case, if I have a thread on that topic, I will publish it there or as I have done a number of times in the past start a new thread.
If you can identify yourself with some consistent pseudonym and resubmit your comments, I am sure that your comments will be posted. But, again, I don't accept commercials for anything just as I don't display any commercials on my blog.
By the way, note: I have published your current comment here. ..Maurice.
NOTE: I have discovered why the attempted postings of some of my visitors never was sent to me by Blogger.com for moderation and publishing: TOO MANY CHARACTERS! If you write more than 4096 characters (I presume that includes spaces) when you think you are posting the message--your aren't. There is a notice in the posting window just below your text that explains that you have overwritten 4096 characters. This limit is seeming set by Blogger.com program. This means you need to edit your posting and retype. Remember 4096 chararcters..NOT WORDS. ..Maurice.
Doctor Bernstein,
Just ran across this - thought you might be interested in it as a topic for your blog.
http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/asiapcf/08/14/australia.right.to.die/index.html
Thanks for the link and I may put it up within a new topic. It is important that in these current days of healthcare reform debate in the United States that everyone should be aware that our Supreme Court has long ago permitted the termination or withholding of life-supportive treatment at the request of the patient. If the physician follows the patient's request, the action does not represent suicide, physician-assisted suicide nor euthanasia. It represents simply the generally held right of any patient to refuse medical treatment. The only exception would be where the action of refusal would pose an injury or hazard to others. Again, thanks. ..Maurice.
This discussion on KevinMD got me wondering if this may be a reasonable topic for this forum.
It seems like the doctors today pressure or blackmail people into screening without ever mentioning risks of screenings or real probability of benefit to an individual and often against current recommendations. This includes
- testing men for PSA without discussing benefits or risks and without even mentioning the test i.e. by simply marking it on blood test request
- performing or ordering non-recommended tests on physicals
- denying women BCP unless they do yearly pap smears (more than recommended) and yearly ObGyn exam even though 1) pap smears are recommended less often 2) there is no medical reason for requiring pap smears for birth control.
The last practice seems to me a borderline illegal as it is blackmail, but even if it is legal, it really seems to be unethical. Yet it is pervasive.
I carry a no implied consent, recognition of my own autonomy, and the right to my own self determination card all witnessed w/ a health care agent. This is all because I will never willingly have a foley catheter inserted again!!! The time I did have a catheter I was held down by 4 nurses while a fifth nurse installed the thing in me. I feel violated, traumatized, and because of this I will never willingly go to a hospital again. I realize That if I'm unconscious I probably won't have a choice. Therefore I've also learned the mechanics of a foley and can pretty much remove it myself which I will do just to piss off the staff. All of this because they did'nt respect me. I feel they've pretty much signed my death warrant. By the way this also resulted in a settlement with the hospital, I would rather of had the respect..... steve
Steve, I copied your comments over to the pertinent subject thread "Patient Modesty: Volume 39". ..Maurice.
Where are people supposed to go when they feel violated by the medical profession? When a person loses trust and confidence in people, when they belive medical information is not safe? Because of what happened to me, I have been left with PTSD. I don't need a doctor to diagnose that with every one of the symptons there. It's not that easy to say go somewhere else when you feel there is no safe place to go. Go somewhere else, why? To have another tag hung on you that is wrong, to have information out there to smear your name. I absoluteley hate what happened to me. I was not like this before. Now I am filled with anger, hatred and the deepest mistrust of the medical profession you could imagine.
Perhaps you should ask your medical people how they repair
something that they broke.
What has happened to Freedom of Choice, Freedom of Religion, and Human Rights in the Medical Field?In an Emergency, Why should a person be forced to go to a particular hospital to be treated? Perhaps it is an abortion hospital that kills babies and the person considers that a serious moral violation and therefore would not want to use that hospital. On the other hand, it might be a Catholic hospital and the person is an Atheist and wants no part of that environment. Furthermore, why should the person be forced to go to any hospital if they desire not to be treated? Seems to me that the Nazi's stated out this way. Take away freedom, take a way choice, take away religious rights. Why aren't doctors speaking out against these violations of human dignity? Or is it thathat they have all thrown in with Big Brother and Big Money. What's next concentration camps?
Steve,
Where does one get a no implied consent , recognition of my own autonomy and the right to my own self determination card? MDS
So here's MY question, i'm working a lawsuit for Medical Malpractice against a hospital for damages to my son. He was born "Clinically Dead", rescusitated and brought back to life, and now has multiple disabilities. So, can a doctor or hospital be sued for "Wrongful Death" since he was technically dead when born because of the doctor?
To Anonymous 12:02AM today:
You must check with your lawyer as to whether you have a valid malpractice case. By the way, "clinically dead" means dead (the clinical criteria for death is met)and the dead cannot be resuscitated. Death criteria is set by heart-respiration cessation for usually 5 minutes or the meeting of the standards for death by neurologic criteria despite the heart continuing to beat. ..Maurice.
Dear Dr. Maurice,
I am confused. I am reading, the book, "Brain Death", by Dr. Wijdicks. He said,'that anesthestia is never used in the retrieval of organs, just neuromuscular blocking agent. What are neursomuscular blocking agents? It sounds like it is an agent to block a transmition from a dead brain. Is this true?
I already wrote to you. I am pretty sure my kid's neurologist is lying to me. Claiming my kid had something that she didn't have when it was clearly something else. Of course my daughter was injured. I am rather disturbed by the fact that when I contacted a lawyer they said it was hard to sue a neurologist. They tend to stick together and not ever testify against one another. I am disgusted with their lying, deceiving and I swear when I called it out one of them even smirked. Call me Disgusted
Your article on "gawking" was very poignant. Thank you for writing it. I happen to be one of those patient's who has been gawked at since I was a child. And, it has not stopped. I was born with two deformities, the left hand with finger mutations and the right leg with a foot deformity which was amputated at the age of 4. I am now 48 years old. As a child I adapted quickly to my prosthesis and I was constantly in medical school auditoriums in my undergarments walking on stage showing the medical students what a "great walker" I was and how well adjusted a child I had become. Gawking is an understatement. No one ever asked if I wanted to do this. I was mortified, ashamed, and utterly embarrassed. This continued well into my teenage years until I said no and it finally came to a stop. Fast forward to adult life. My hand became a fascination to international medical residents to the point where they would have their camera phones and take pictures and videos of my hand despite my saying no. The amazing thing is that the local doctors did not stop this invasion of privacy despite my very vocal disapproval. I will add this happened in major university medical centers ... not some little town in nowhere USA. I agree that informed consent should be obtained before all the gawking begins but in instances where the person specifically says no ... then it should stop no matter how interesting it may be to photograph the deformity and take home to show someone else. To quote the elephant man (I think), "I am still a person not an animal". I am a professional woman with two masters degrees one of which is in bioethics ... needless to say your article hit home. Thank you again for writing it. [MM]
While working as an RN in a trauma room were seriously injured people are taken for treatment I witnessed this scenario of the double standard of modesty for male patient many times. The first thing the medical staff would do is cut all the patients clothes off to examine their entire body. A digital rectal exam is performed to see if there is blood in their rectum and then the patient would be catheterized to obtain a sample of their urine to analyse and detect the presence of blood. This is done to all patients. Many trauma's were a result of car accident's or crime victims etc so the police would normally be involved. The police would routinely walk in the trauma room and were allowed to stand around and watch as patients, that is male patients were put through this necessary but extremely embarrassing ordeal . If the patient was a female the curtains would be immediately closed and kept closed until the entire trauma procedure was complete. If the patient was a male the curtains were always left open and the police officers which often included female officers were allowed to watch as the patient was stripped naked, under went the rectal exam and catheterized. Allowing the police especially female police officers to watch this is blatant patient abuse. I think this double standard of modesty for male patients is an extreme violation of medical ethics and standards of decency that are supposed to apply to all patients. If the police have a reason to enter the trauma room which they often do the curtains should be closed for male patients as well. Police should not be allowed to enter the trauma room in the first place without permission or be allowed to " hang out " there while patients are being treated. Quite often female patients in the trauma room are naked and will be seen by the police officers before the staff has a chance to close the curtains so this is a violation of their modesty as well. Curtains stop you from seeing but not hearing everything that's going on behind them so this is also a violation of the privacy and confidentiality of both male and female patients. The police presence in the room amounts to a combination voyeurism and morbid curiosity.
I am publishing the last two comments (from June 24 2013 and from today) on the Patient Modesty: Volume 69 thread. ..Maurice.
I am so sick and disgusted with having rational suicide discussed in terms of psychology with barely a mention of sociological factors. I am a 71 year old woman who was married for 49 years. At age 76, late last year, he suddenly needed open hear surgery (quintuple bypass, aortic valve replacement, aorta replacement, etc., etc.. He came out of the surgery paranoid and manic. The surgeon sent him home, instead of sending him to a rehab facility, which I protested but was ignored. At home, he was still manic and increasingly paranoid which culminated in him calling the police and accusing me of denying him health care. I had home health nurses and physical therapists, and even the Sheriff's Department who came out to the house when he called all of whom agreed that there was no abuse on my part, in fact quite the contrary. However, Social Services filed a restraining order on me for "threatening" my husband (how or with what was not stated). My husband filed for divorce. As far as I know he is still manic and paranoid and untreated and I am unable to do anything about it. Between my husband's Social Security and mine and his pensions, we had enough to keep the house going. In Oregon, divorce is is straight 50-50 split, which means I will have my $824.00 Social Security (I was medically restricted to part time work for over 30 years) and maybe another $500 from him to live on. There will be less than $100,00. in equity when the house is sold for me. In addition, I am Bipolar II, hypomanic, have no living relatives or friends who can help, and room rentals start at over $600.00 per month. Despite being spectacularly well educated and having a good appearance for my age, nobody is remotely interested in hiring me. You can see that the math doesn't add up. I can't buy a condo or a house. I can't even rent a room. I can't even rent a place to store my possessions. And forget about insurance. (Health conditions make it impossible for me to share a room.) So my choices, beginning next month with the divorce, will be suicide, life on the street, or (maybe) living at the Mission as no ground floor public housing is available. Believe me, my bipolar condition isn't going to be the cause of my suicide. You can discuss the finer points of medical ethics and the nuances of medical conditions but the cause of my impending death and that of other people in similar circumstances will be simply because nobody cares
which is a sociological not psychological cause. Dare you to publish this! Or would that let too much light into the ivory tower?
Anonymous from today: You see, your concerns have been published. It is great that you have access to a computer (through a local library??) so you can communicate to me and the viewers on this blog. From what you write, there is no doubt in my mind that you need assistance. Your entire life situation necessitates the private consultation with a social worker and that access can be started by going to a local hospital and discussing your issues with the hospital social service department. This would represent the first step in getting consultation and set on a path toward improving your concerns, health and future. ..Maurice.
Who chaperones my wife when the doctor or PA is a lesbian, for all you know she has a lesbian nurse for her chaperone.
I am publishing Lloyd's comment on "Patient Modesty: Volume 81"
http://bioethicsdiscussion.blogspot.com/2017/08/patient-modesty-volume-81.html
where he may get some worthy responses. ..Maurice.
Medical blacklisting is outright punitive punishment. A class action lawsuit is warranted in all cases. No doctor has the right to prevent a patient from finding
a better doctor or alternative treatment. It's one thing to dismiss a patient, but quite another to permanently blacklist them for life. That's putting the patient in physical and possible emotional danger. I'm a private detective building a case against one such doctor.
Post a Comment
<< Home