I am of two minds here. On the one hand, Invermectin has apparently been used with success on some patients in this country and in other countries it is used regularly, on the other hand, I do not like it when Judges start ordering medical treatment. Black robed tyranny is way out of hand.
The judge ordered bc the wife requested help for her husband. The judge didn’t just barge in and do this. The wife should be able to help her husband in anyway she can
I agree that a judge should not be ordering treatments. However, I believe a Judge should order patient freedoms / rights. Since there is anecdotal evidence that ivermectin works, the patient should have the right to opt-in to such treatment. However, doing so would / should absolve the hospital and staff from any claims.
According to this article, the patient's wife (and, presumably, the patient himself) and the patient's own doctor wanted to administer the Ivermectin but the hospital itself refused to allow it. This is not a case of some judge directing how a particular physician should practice medicine.
Truth is, anybody who goes to a hospital for treatment of COVID will be lucky to escape alive. The CDC directed treatment protocol is itself lethal in many cases. Hospitals don't care. They make more money by putting a patient on a ventilator and killing them than by treating them properly. I'm surprised that, this far along in the "pandemic," more people don't realize what's going on here.
I agree... At least this Judge is making an effort to do something MORAL at the request of a family member for a change compared to the other rulings. What have they got to lose at this point? Guy is going to die anyhow so why not try?
I would approve if it was me... In fact I have a standing order to my family to force this point if it comes to it like this wife did. The government should not be denying requests of treatment either! The judge is morally righting this wrong.
“I do not like it when Judges start ordering medical treatment. Black robed tyranny is way out of hand.”
He is not ordering medical treatment he is ordering the Hospital to follow the patients Doctors treatment of Ivermectin.
read the article. The mans doctor prescribed ivermectin, because it definitely won’t hurt, and the hospital refused to administer. The judge is siding with the doctor against the hospital.
The judge essentially ALLOWED the hospital to administer the drug as requested by the WIFE. She brought a suit against the hospital.
In general I agree, but the judge only sided with the family and the family doctor in this case. This was not an arbitrary intervention.
But it was issued in response to a citizen’s appeal for a court order to do so. I think that’s a reasonable use.
The judge ordered the HOSPITAL to provide the treatment requested by the family/patient and prescribed by the family physician. And they signed liability waivers.
How about hospitals not insert themselves needlessly into patient/doctor relationships based on non-binding CDC recommendations. No actual laws or regulations were being violated.
I have no problem with a court enforcing a patient’s medical wishes over those of the medical establishment.
Judge wasn’t flying solo, here.
It’s not a blanket order, but directed at one hospital in support of a family wife seeking to carry out the medical treatment wishes of her husband.
In this case I’m in favor of kicking the hospital’s butt into line.
He was supporting what the wife was requesting that the stupid hospital would not do, that’s all.
Hospitals work for us, not the other way around. She had signed a liability release. I’m all for Ivermectin, I dont think it is really intended that late in the game but his wife should be allowed to make that decisions and the hospital should honor it!https://freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3990394/posts?page=1
Exactly, we have politicians and now judges requiring certain medical treatments. How did it get this bad? Oh that’s right, we have an illegitimate president.