To: Concerned
And anyone who's ever come within a mile of litigation knows that there is a difference between the opinions of doctors who actually have a doctor/patient relationship and doctors who read some records or maybe examine the patient once.
79 posted on
10/28/2003 2:04:26 PM PST by
lugsoul
(And I threw down my enemy and smote his ruin on the mountainside)
To: lugsoul
What the hell is that supposed to mean?
80 posted on
10/28/2003 2:56:33 PM PST by
Houmatt
(Pray for Terri Schiavo!)
To: lugsoul
It is supposed to mean that the opinion of a doctor who looks at a chart and gives an opinion which favors the side of the person who asked him to look at the chart and give the opinion isn't worth very much - and certainly isn't worth anywhere near as much as the opinion of a doctor that has actually been involved in making decisions regarding the treatment of the patient.
84 posted on
10/28/2003 6:41:40 PM PST by
lugsoul
(And I threw down my enemy and smote his ruin on the mountainside)
To: lugsoul
LUGSOUL WROTE: "And anyone who's ever come within a mile of litigation knows that there is a difference between the opinions of doctors who actually have a doctor/patient
relationship and doctors who read some records or maybe examine the patient once."
I AM RESPONDING: "I agree. However, when the opposing PRO-LIFE side cannot even ACCESS the patient with their own Doctors and specialists, it makes it kind of hard to compete with ones who are being PAID by the PRO-DEATH side. And there is a BIG difference between a Doctor who is PAID by the PRO-DEATH side who just superficially visits and a PRO-LIFE one who has had a former Doctor/patient relationship with the patient."
I AM ADDING: "The next best choice would be NON-CONFLICTED former Doctors or Nurses of the patient, who are NOT being paid by EITHER side, who decide to come forward at their own risk, e.g. Carla Sauer Iyer, Heidi Law and Carolyn Johnson."
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson