The Cellar  

Go Back   The Cellar > Main > Politics

Politics Where we learn not to think less of others who don't share our views

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 04-23-2009, 01:10 PM   #46
Clodfobble
Sulky Cultivator in the Woods
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 15,652
If you put cameras in the operating room, then standardized procedures suddenly become open to subjective opinion. WTF does a lawyer know about the best way to suture something? Nothing--but if he can convince 12 other people who don't have a medical degree that those sutures "don't look like they're being done right," that doctor will lose a lawsuit that never should have existed. Quite frankly, sugarpop, you are the exact type of person who would look at an operation room video with your emotions, and just feel in your heart that some sort of malpractice is taking place rather than acknowledge you didn't know what the hell you were talking about.
__________________
My cooking blog
Clodfobble is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 04-23-2009, 02:20 PM   #47
classicman
Chock full O' facts
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 21,412
__________________
"like strapping a pillow on a bull in a china shop" Bullitt
classicman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-23-2009, 02:59 PM   #48
TheMercenary
“Hypocrisy: prejudice with a halo”
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Savannah, Georgia
Posts: 21,393
Clod said it best. There was a short time when people use to actually film and record laproscopic procedures when they first started doing them, specifically cholesystectomies (gall bladder removal). They stopped doing it soon after they started.
__________________
Anyone but the this most fuked up President in History in 2012!
TheMercenary is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-23-2009, 04:33 PM   #49
sugarpop
Professor
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: the edge of the abyss
Posts: 1,947
It would have to looked at by other professionals, not lawyers.
sugarpop is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-23-2009, 04:39 PM   #50
TheMercenary
“Hypocrisy: prejudice with a halo”
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Savannah, Georgia
Posts: 21,393
Unfortunately that is not how our system is set up. A jury of your peers is hardly ever composed of your peers.
__________________
Anyone but the this most fuked up President in History in 2012!
TheMercenary is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-23-2009, 04:42 PM   #51
sugarpop
Professor
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: the edge of the abyss
Posts: 1,947
No, but they have to have expert testimony.
sugarpop is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-23-2009, 04:47 PM   #52
TheMercenary
“Hypocrisy: prejudice with a halo”
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Savannah, Georgia
Posts: 21,393
Even with that a clever lawyer can get answers to questions they want while they supress others. That is the art of a good lawyer. If Doctors had juries made up of only doctors I think you would have a much different outcome in many cases.
__________________
Anyone but the this most fuked up President in History in 2012!
TheMercenary is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-23-2009, 04:59 PM   #53
DanaC
Better call Saul!
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Yorkshire
Posts: 22,134
Expert testimony, like that given by a medical expert leading to the wrongful conviction of numerous women because of a series of (criminally) mistaken diagnoses of so-called shaken baby syndrome.?
DanaC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-23-2009, 05:13 PM   #54
sugarpop
Professor
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: the edge of the abyss
Posts: 1,947
huh? Shaking a baby is bad. It can be very damaging to their tiny brains.
sugarpop is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-23-2009, 06:55 PM   #55
DanaC
Better call Saul!
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Yorkshire
Posts: 22,134
Yes. Shaking a baby is bad. But a medical expert's evidence led to several women being convicted of murdering either their own children or the babies in their charge (one very prominent case was of a babysitter). That evidence was shown in the end to have been entirely misleading.

In one case, (the babusitter I mentioned) the evidence given was that she must have shook the child so violently and then swung it against the bannister rail of the stair with a force equivalent to a car hitting a stationary object. There was no bruising consistent with this. Nor was any attention paid to several other very important details. It was purely by chance that a doctor watching a programme about it and seeing aphoto of the kiddie in question before he died, noticed his eye drooping slightly and beginning to turn in. Turned out the child had some very serious and undiagnosed health problems. There was no violence involved in his death. It was just a tragic situation.

The same doctor who insisted that this child's injuries were consistent with the kind of injuries 'expected' in 'shaken baby syndrome' has also provided the mostdamning evidence in other cases involving mothers whose children had died of cot death. he was insistent that actually they were shaken to death. He has even made suggestions to the effect that most cot-deaths are in fact abuse.


Hiss was a very prominent case and I believe he has been struck off now as a medical practitioner. His evidence was not just inadequate it was in some cases actually dishonest. But...he was an expert witness. The fact he'd been an expert witness in so many cases only served to increase his prestige until the miscarriages of justice began to come to light. He was an expert witness, and on the basis primarily of his evidence juries convicted several women of murder, including some who'd actually lost their baby to cot death and were still grieving.
DanaC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-23-2009, 07:07 PM   #56
sugarpop
Professor
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: the edge of the abyss
Posts: 1,947
There are some doctors who provide "expert" evaluations that are anything but. IMO the solution is to get them out of the system.
sugarpop is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-23-2009, 07:33 PM   #57
classicman
Chock full O' facts
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 21,412
Quote:
Originally Posted by sugarpop View Post
It would have to looked at by other professionals, not lawyers.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sugarpop View Post
There are some doctors who provide "expert" evaluations that are anything but.
yup - thats why they don't need nor want no stinkin cameras.
__________________
"like strapping a pillow on a bull in a china shop" Bullitt
classicman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-24-2009, 07:52 AM   #58
glatt
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 20,791
Quote:
Originally Posted by sugarpop View Post
There are some doctors who provide "expert" evaluations that are anything but. IMO the solution is to get them out of the system.
When a case that requires experts goes to trial, we get an expert for our side. They get an expert for their side. Usually, the two experts will contradict each other. You can almost always find a qualified expert to oppose a position. Just look at the global warming "debate."
glatt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-24-2009, 11:24 AM   #59
xoxoxoBruce
The future is unwritten
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 45,160
No problem, have each expert present their case and the Cellar will decide their validity. We Rule!
__________________
Everything is interesting... look closer.
xoxoxoBruce is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-24-2009, 02:22 PM   #60
kerosene
Touring the facilities
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: The plains of Colorado
Posts: 3,474
Quote:
Originally Posted by xoxoxoBruce View Post
No problem, have each expert present their case and the Cellar will decide their validity. We Rule!
I will not be presented by any experts and I don't need anybody to decide whether I am valid, thank you very MUCH! :p
kerosene is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:29 PM.

Help fill the mug... click to donate
We are not afraid to entrust the American people with unpleasant facts, foreign ideas, alien philosophies, and competitive values. For a nation that is afraid to let its people judge the truth and falsehood in an open market is a nation that is afraid of its people.
- John F. Kennedy, on the 20th anniversary of the Voice of America, 2/26/62

Powered by: vBulletin Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.