There's a huge gap between "anything" and "free care," isn't there? Yes, I expect a lot from my health care provider. But then, so do the state, specialty societies, health insurance companies &c, &c, &c.
To the specific issue of free care, that's a huge issue for doctors. They can even get in trouble if they too readily forgive patient copay amounts! I know doctors are reluctant to dismiss patients who won't pay for care, and it has to be done a certain way to prevent legal repercussions. I think they - or at least practice staff - should be willing to try to work with patients who can't afford to pay for care. But that involves determining how much the patient CAN pay. I didn't see that in the post linked.
And again, she was an extreme example. I really think the practice would have been within its rights to give her the boot. She was a difficult patient and you're allowed to get rid of those as well.View Thread
We allow terminally ill people to select and providers to administer palliative care when aggressive measures could keep them alive longer. I could imagine a person refusing to eat or drink, which would be a nasty way to go and would take about 3 - 5 days. Should we then say to this person, nope we're going to stick a feeding tube in you, because we care?
It's an individual's choice made with his health care provider. The state should stay out.View Thread
Nope. Unless the getting cozy was unambiguous I'd have no idea what was going on. And then there are couples who are in open relationships, so I'd have to know that also wasn't the case. However, if I was very certain that the spouse/partner of someone I knew very well was stepping outside of the agreed upon bounds of the relationship, I might walk up to the spouse and say hi. Just to freak him/her out a bit. View Thread
I wouldn't say fear is the right word. Seeing a kid being hit very hard with a belt would make me feel ill.
But you made me think of something else, which is the trial. The defense team will be able to do a lot with this video, including, possibly, arguing that there's no way dad can get a fair trial. It would certainly be raised during jury selection, if it goes that far. Why not just give the tape to the police?View Thread
I think a real hero would have gone straight to the police and skipped the public footage.. but, then how would he receive his 15 minutes of fame?
Again, I agree 100%. It's scary to think the reaction to seeing someone in harm's way is to take a picture or movie.
Before we go reporting people, we need to be very sure of the facts.
I think I see what you're saying but the problem is as private citizens we rarely have the ability to be sure of the facts because we don't have the power to investigate. That's the state's duty. Does the state sometimes get carried away? Sure. But I think there are far more cases where the state doesn't investigate or doesn't take adequate steps to protect people. (Not blaming anyone, law enforcement and social services are overburdened.)View Thread
I wonder how long it's going to take that poor child to get over the trauma of being an "internet sensation". An excellent point.
That's part of why I wondered if the person obscured the child's face. The other part being I just think it is wrong to post a child's face on the internet without the guardian's permission.View Thread
I didn't watch the video because I can't really handle violence, especially if it involves children. I don't know. One or two swats with a belt, hand or switch, I wouldn't like it, but I wouldn't call the police. If the person were using what I thought was excessive force and/or seemed to have lost his temper, I'd call in a New York minute.
I also think someone who posts something like that online rather than calling the police could use a flick round the ear. Did he at least obscure the child's face?
As for the charges, it is true that police will sometimes charge someone with something even they know won't stick. But it could also be that the child suffered injuries that fully warrant the charge.View Thread