Replies

As far as I can tell, everyone admits that lethal doses were given, even Dr. Pou. While she says that her INTENT was not to kill them, but she admits that her actions did.

The account of the "doctor who fled the scene" is supported by other staff who were there and to my knowledge has never been disputed.

The 8 mg dose is not what is at issue and is just a smokescreen you are hiding behind.

You Pou apologists need to get their stories straight. You are working against each other, and her.

You Pou apologists need to get their stories straight.

It must be difficult for the culture of death to weigh their options.

The have two basic choices in any case:
1. The dead person wanted to be killed and/or it was the "humane" thing to do. (With this option, they cannot seem to accept that this is still illegal.)
or
2. There was no intent to kill the person. (They really hate this option because it totally contradicts their premise that euthanasia is ALWAYS "humane.")

"The 8 mg dose is not what is at issue and is just a smokescreen you are hiding behind."

No. That is the dose that indicates what they all probably recieved. The lawyer gave the dose that was given to his ma. Are you going to tell me doc Pau noted the old lady's kid was a lawyer, so she got singled out for a special dose?

"As far as I can tell, everyone admits that lethal doses were given, even Dr. Pou."

She absolutely denies giving a lethal dose, and so do the others involved.

"The account of the "doctor who fled the scene" is supported by other staff who were there and to my knowledge has never been disputed."

The account of the doc that deserted has been vigorously disputed by all those he slandered. As I said, there may have been a discussion regarding treatment, but no one advocated killing the patients.

"You Pou apologists need to get their stories straight."

Ridiculous. You've provided no concrete evidence, such as the results of a tox report that shows the presence of a lethal dose of meds. You're following the lead of a deserter and "experts" that have repeatedly and still fail to provide any evidence whatsoever that a crime was committed.

"Lethal dose" is something easily disputed. A dose that is lethal for one person (generally someone not already on the medication) may not be lethal for another (who may be taking larger and larger doses of meds to control pain). It is a fact that these meds often hasten death, a risk that is balanced. Weighing risks is not intent to murder.

Dosage is controlled in CCUs by gadgets. Even in the best of circumstances, these gadgets require maintenance. In the worst of circumstances, they don't get that mainenance. Then the patients get their meds by injection--in the dark, in sweltering heat with stale air--under stressful conditions that you cannot begin to appreciate from your safe, lighted, air-conditioned, well-plumbed office.

And before you jump in with your infernally silly--"That's no excuse to commit murder"--poor outcomes happen for reasons other than murder--like catastrophic floods!!