| Author |
Topic:
Survey: Doctors' personal beliefs can hinder care
|
malkieD2
Title: EuroMod™-JCC - FFUK-RSA Emeritus
Registered:
Jun '02
|
Date Posted:
8/9/07 12:52am
Subject:
RE: Survey: Doctors' personal beliefs can hinder care
|
KK posted:
malkie, I've backed my opinon up with historical fact. I've offered to provide you with more of it as well. Those are the founding principles of the US government as stated by the people who founded it, and they borrowed directly from the governing principles of the British government. You calling it just my opinion doesn't change the historical fact.
Sorry, but you can't claim its the purpose of government, but then conceed they don't do it. The purpose of healthcare is quite clear, and well defined, however, apparently the purpose of government is not. I really don't care what you believe the purpose of government is - it doesn't alter the purpose of healthcare.
KK posted:
If that's what passes for doctorate-level reasoning in the UK, you should get your tuition back. You got ripped off.
Why must you consistently resort to cheap jabs at me? You've patronised, insulted, questioned the existence of my creditials repeatedly. It really detracted from any points you are attempted to make.
Must I also remind you (which I pointed out, but at the time you refused to believe), that we don't pay tuition for doctorates in the UK. The University pay your tuition in addition to providing the student with a healthy stipend.
That aside, please also remember, that my apparent lack of "doctorate-level reasoning" didn't stop me being hand-picked by your government to set-up, establish and drive-forward a new research institute in your wonderful capital city.
-----signature-----
HBOF  There are only 10 types of people in this world; those who understand binary jokes, and those who don't. If you don't already know, you'll never understand. If you already know, no explanation is needed - KW
|
Locked Topic |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Kimball_Kinnison
Registered:
Oct '01
|
Date Posted:
8/9/07 2:49am
Subject:
RE: Survey: Doctors' personal beliefs can hinder care
|
malkieD2 posted:
Sorry, but you can't claim its the purpose of government, but then conceed they don't do it. The purpose of healthcare is quite clear, and well defined, however, apparently the purpose of government is not. I really don't care what you believe the purpose of government is - it doesn't alter the purpose of healthcare.
Way to miss my point. As I said, government isn't perfect, but just because it isn't perfect is no reason to make it move farther and farther away from the ideal upon which it was founded.
That's like saying "Oh, well. I just broke the law by speeding. I might as well go even faster now." It's illogical.
And I don't care what you think the purpose of healthcare is, it doesn't alter the purpose or responsibilities of government.
malkieD2 posted:
Why must you consistently resort to cheap jabs at me? You've patronised, insulted, questioned the existence of my creditials repeatedly. It really detracted from any points you are attempted to make.
You have absolutely no leg to stand upon, not when you post things like:malkieD2 posted:
don't you 'get' mockery?
And I didn't question your credentials. I pointed out the simple fact that because this is an online message board, they are inherently unverifiable, and so they should carry less weight than verifiable sources. To do otherwise would be a form of an appeal to authority fallacy.
Kimball Kinnison
-----signature-----
You deserve the wrath of Kimball...- OWM
Why, Kimball... I didn't know you had it in you.- KW
I think that Kimball just made a joke, and a funny joke at that.- Raven
Stupidity got us into this mess, why can't it get us out?
|
Locked Topic |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
malkieD2
Title: EuroMod™-JCC - FFUK-RSA Emeritus
Registered:
Jun '02
|
Date Posted:
8/9/07 4:01am
Subject:
RE: Survey: Doctors' personal beliefs can hinder care
|
I made one jab about your overuse of bolding, yet this was after several personal comments. Your comments towards me have been constant and unprovoked.
KK posted:
Way to miss my point. As I said, government isn't perfect, but just because it isn't perfect is no reason to make it move farther and farther away from the ideal upon which it was founded.
That's like saying "Oh, well. I just broke the law by speeding. I might as well go even faster now." It's illogical.
And I don't care what you think the purpose of healthcare is, it doesn't alter the purpose or responsibilities of government.
That isn't what I'm asserting. You claim that the governments role is a certain way - I'm merely pointing out that this isn't the case in real life. It still doesn't alter the purpose of healthcare. The stance I have is in line with the purpose of healthcare, while the stance you hold is not.
-----signature-----
HBOF There are only 10 types of people in this world; those who understand binary jokes, and those who don't. If you don't already know, you'll never understand. If you already know, no explanation is needed - KW
|
Locked Topic |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Kimball_Kinnison
Registered:
Oct '01
|
Date Posted:
8/9/07 4:19am
Subject:
RE: Survey: Doctors' personal beliefs can hinder care
|
malkieD2 posted:
That isn't what I'm asserting. You claim that the governments role is a certain way - I'm merely pointing out that this isn't the case in real life. It still doesn't alter the purpose of healthcare. The stance I have is in line with the purpose of healthcare, while the stance you hold is not.
Except is is demonstrably against the purpose of government.
I'm not saying that the healthcare industry can't choose to regulate itself in some fashion. What I'm saying is that it is completely inappropriate for you to use the government to do so. Of course, that's completely in line with my other efforts to get the government to actually live up to its founding principles.
And nice switcheroo there. I haven't talked about government's role, but it's purpose. There is a big difference.
In short, you argue that because the government has already inappropriately usurped the authority to compel people to violate their beliefs in the healthcare field (in spite of explicit, codified limitations on doing so), there's no problem with expanding that. I, on the other hand, say that it was wrong to arbitrarily expand the government's power that way, and it is wrong to continue expanding it.
Two wrongs don't make a right. Just because the government's role was wrongly expanded in the past doesn't make it right to continue expanding it today.
Kimball Kinnison
-----signature-----
You deserve the wrath of Kimball...- OWM
Why, Kimball... I didn't know you had it in you.- KW
I think that Kimball just made a joke, and a funny joke at that.- Raven
Stupidity got us into this mess, why can't it get us out?
|
Locked Topic |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
malkieD2
Title: EuroMod™-JCC - FFUK-RSA Emeritus
Registered:
Jun '02
|
Date Posted:
8/9/07 6:55am
Subject:
RE: Survey: Doctors' personal beliefs can hinder care
|
I don't agree that the governments role has been inappropriately or wrongly expanded.
However, all of that aside, it still doesn't make any different to the central core of my arguement.
-----signature-----
HBOF There are only 10 types of people in this world; those who understand binary jokes, and those who don't. If you don't already know, you'll never understand. If you already know, no explanation is needed - KW
|
Locked Topic |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Vaderize03
Title: Manager Emeritus
Registered:
Oct '99
|
Date Posted:
8/9/07 8:17am
Subject:
RE: Survey: Doctors' personal beliefs can hinder care
- Date Edited:
8/9/07 8:22am (2 edits total)
Edited By:
Vaderize03
|
You know what I've noticed around here, MasterSweetPea?
That a lot of people say things in an argument and then when challenged, they claim they really meant something else.
You made a claim that seemed pretty obvious in it's intent, and I responded. I made the point that instead of trying to dismantle the places where abortions were performed by making them financially insolvent, despite the other vital services such clinics provide, the governor should attempt to ban the service in question.
You responded by claiming that I broadened your supposedly "narrow" statement and used other examples in the business world to justify your position. This has been the hallmark of the Roberts' Supreme Court; judicial restraint (by his definition) is to issue as narrowly-worded a ruling as possible that can then be applied with very broad strokes. Pretty backhanded, if you ask me.
Why don't people just address difficult questions, for goodness sake? Let the governor sign an elective abortion ban and see if the court will consider it. If not, he's got to live with abortion on demand in his state until the court changes his mind-that's just the way it is.
It reminds me of when the DOJ under Clinton went after anti-abortion protestors outside of clinics using the RICO statutes, and the Supreme Court threw their convictions out. That's not what the statutes were for, and the court acted appropriately. Instead, Congress passed the Freedom of Access to Clinics Act to address the specific problem in question.
Why should "backhanded" be "right" or "acceptable"?
Peace,
V-03
-----signature-----
"Bring your pretty face to my axe....."
B-O-H-I-C-A !! (that was funny DM!)
"I'm what Willis was talking about"
|
Locked Topic |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Darth_Overlord
Registered:
Jul '01
|
Date Posted:
8/9/07 2:36pm
Subject:
RE: Survey: Doctors' personal beliefs can hinder care
|
|
What was it that made abortions not ambulatory surgery again? I remember it would mean more equipment and staffing and that it was an obvious attempt to force planned parenthood to go bankrupt, but even so, how does it not fit the definition?
-----signature-----
"The whole modern world has divided itself into Conservatives and Progressives. The business of Progressives is to go on making mistakes. The business of the Conservatives is to prevent the mistakes from being corrected."
-G.K. Chesterton
|
Locked Topic |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Master_SweetPea
Registered:
Nov '02
|
Date Posted:
8/9/07 3:25pm
Subject:
RE: Survey: Doctors' personal beliefs can hinder care
|
ya' know what i've noticed around here Vaderize03, is that people read into statements and find things that were never there to begin with.
You made a claim that seemed pretty obvious in it's intent, and I responded. I made the point that instead of trying to dismantle the places where abortions were performed by making them financially insolvent, despite the other vital services such clinics provide, the governor should attempt to ban the service in question.
m'kay, i agreed with you and you dissmissed my parallel of "backhanded"-ness
You responded by claiming that I broadened your supposedly "narrow" statement and used other examples in the business world to justify your position.
Uh no you have it backwards, I was being broad, and you narrow, again go back and read my response, it was you who dismissed my parallel as being nothing like the subject at hand, and those examples were what I was talking about to begin with!
This has been the hallmark of the Roberts' Supreme Court; judicial restraint (by his definition) is to issue as narrowly-worded a ruling as possible that can then be applied with very broad strokes. Pretty backhanded, if you ask me.
ditto
Why don't people just address difficult questions, for goodness sake? Let the governor sign an elective abortion ban and see if the court will consider it. If not, he's got to live with abortion on demand in his state until the court changes his mind-that's just the way it is.
again ditto
It reminds me of when the DOJ under Clinton went after anti-abortion protestors outside of clinics using the RICO statutes, and the Supreme Court threw their convictions out. That's not what the statutes were for, and the court acted appropriately. Instead, Congress passed the Freedom of Access to Clinics Act to address the specific problem in question.
again we seem to agree and have no problem, well actually I hate R.I.C.O.
Why should "backhanded" be "right" or "acceptable"?
It shouldn't, seen my sig? I'm wondering what planet you are on, my point was that "backhanded is bad!"
which is why i stated When will it ever stop?
as the last line of the post, that seems to have been not so clear
so let me spell it out
I hate government regulation.
using the courts to sue a company out of business because you don't like their product is "backhanded" and bad
using Goverment agencies to regulate a business into the ground is "backhanded" and bad
Can't get the all-out ban that you want so you get a "partial" ban on specific ascpects of what you don't like is "backhanded" and bad
okay now are we on the same page?
you see I dislike the regulations on Planned Parenthood the same as I dislike passing a law to require a Pharmacy to carry a certain drug the owner doesn't want to carry.
To me they are the same.
-----signature-----
I don't like the donkeys and I don't like the Elephants http://www.lp.org "Some people never have anything except ideas Go Do it! Lucky Numbers 3, 11, 21, 31, 41, 43"
|
Locked Topic |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Vaderize03
Title: Manager Emeritus
Registered:
Oct '99
|
Date Posted:
8/9/07 3:48pm
Subject:
RE: Survey: Doctors' personal beliefs can hinder care
- Date Edited:
8/9/07 3:49pm (1 edits total)
Edited By:
Vaderize03
|
We actually are in agreement?
Huh, I guess I got the wrong message from your post.
Sorry about that ....
...no harm done.
Peace,
V-03
-----signature-----
"Bring your pretty face to my axe....."
B-O-H-I-C-A !! (that was funny DM!)
"I'm what Willis was talking about"
|
Locked Topic |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Master_SweetPea
Registered:
Nov '02
|
Date Posted:
8/9/07 3:56pm
Subject:
RE: Survey: Doctors' personal beliefs can hinder care
|
well i am a science major (pre-pharmacy)
so it could be my writing skills are not the best
in spite of all those Gordon Rule classes
-----signature-----
I don't like the donkeys and I don't like the Elephants http://www.lp.org "Some people never have anything except ideas Go Do it! Lucky Numbers 3, 11, 21, 31, 41, 43"
|
Locked Topic |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Master_SweetPea
Registered:
Nov '02
|
Date Posted:
1/20 7:10am
Subject:
RE: Survey: Doctors' personal beliefs can hinder care
- Date Edited:
1/20 7:14am (1 edits total)
Edited By:
Master_SweetPea
|
In previous posts there was some discussion of passing laws to require Pharmacists to fill any valid prescription that they receive.
Since I work in a Pharmacy and I have become a Certified Pharmacy Tech, I think about the impact this law could have if passed. I see the dangers on a daily basis.
In any business with “customers” (patients) there will those that are complete and total jerks.
Last week I had a patient scream at me and say that I was a “Stupid ****!”, if he acts like that repeatedly he could be banned from our chain.
Last night we had an individual come in and expect his prescription to be ready, however because the Nurse called it in to the voice mail instead of directly to the Pharmacist it was going to take at least 45 minutes for us to get it ready. He found this to be unacceptable and began yelling and swearing and insulting the Pharmacy staff. The man eventually left after a manager repeatedly asked him to go.
We also get people who have misinformed Doctors. We get people who demand a generic because their Doctor told them one exists, but there is no generic on the market, or it’s been recalled etc. These people often demand that we order it for them, even though that’s not possible.
But, if the proposed law is passed people like this could stay as long as they wanted. The customer would have the “upper hand.” An advocate could find out a Pharmacists schedule and always have them fill the prescription they dislike. This would be legalized harassment.
We already have to put up with enough, rude and obnoxious behavior from patients. Passing this law, is uncalled for.
Mail order pharmacies can fill oral contraceptives. Emergency contraceptives should be obtained and kept on hand in the
home of anyone who thinks they might ever need them. There is a reason the word “emergency” is in the title. Since Plan B is already a Behind the counter OTC, a pharmacist isn’t even required. So this law would have little impact.
-----signature-----
I don't like the donkeys and I don't like the Elephants http://www.lp.org "Some people never have anything except ideas Go Do it! Lucky Numbers 3, 11, 21, 31, 41, 43"
|
Locked Topic |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
malkieD2
Title: EuroMod™-JCC - FFUK-RSA Emeritus
Registered:
Jun '02
|
Date Posted:
1/20 8:30am
Subject:
RE: Survey: Doctors' personal beliefs can hinder care
|
You shouldn't have to tolerate physical or verbal abuse, and this new law bares no relevance to this.
Emergency contraceptives should be obtained and kept on hand in the home of anyone who thinks they might ever need them.
completely missing the point here - the same issue will occur when they step into the pharmacy to obtain the contraceptives in the first place.
Since Plan B is already a Behind the counter OTC, a pharmacist isn’t even required.
but not available to everyone, so largely irrelevant.
The point remains - your primary concern is the patient in need - everything else is secondard.
-----signature-----
HBOF There are only 10 types of people in this world; those who understand binary jokes, and those who don't. If you don't already know, you'll never understand. If you already know, no explanation is needed - KW
|
Locked Topic |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Lord_Vivec
Registered:
Apr '06
|
Date Posted:
1/21 11:19am
Subject:
RE: Survey: Doctors' personal beliefs can hinder care
|
malkieD2 posted:
You shouldn't have to tolerate physical or verbal abuse, and this new law bares no relevance to this.
Emergency contraceptives should be obtained and kept on hand in the home of anyone who thinks they might ever need them.
completely missing the point here - the same issue will occur when they step into the pharmacy to obtain the contraceptives in the first place.
Since Plan B is already a Behind the counter OTC, a pharmacist isn’t even required.
but not available to everyone, so largely irrelevant.
The point remains - your primary concern is the patient in need - everything else is secondard.
I don't think you should be telling a pharmacist what his/her primary concern is. After all, MSP is the pharmacist.
-----signature-----
EUS Vice Chancellor
Do you enjoy pajamas?
Obama/Biden '08
|
Locked Topic |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Master_SweetPea
Registered:
Nov '02
|
Date Posted:
1/21 6:32pm
Subject:
RE: Survey: Doctors' personal beliefs can hinder care
|
Lord_Vivec posted:
I don't think you should be telling a pharmacist what his/her primary concern is. After all, MSP is the pharmacist.
uhm...actually I'm the Technician, but I'll be the Pharmacist in about 5 years. (4 years of school, 1 year of residency)
malkieD2 posted:
completely missing the point here - the same issue will occur when they step into the pharmacy to obtain the contraceptives in the first place.
The point remains - your primary concern is the patient in need - everything else is secondard.
I think you missed my point, EMERGENCY contraceptives are called that because they are for an emergency, If someone knows that is an option they should go ahead and take the measures to get it BEFORE an emergency happens.
This is a theme we see time and time again.
build the ark before the storm.
Evacuate the city before the levees breach.
lock up your bicycle before someone tries to steal it.
get the smallpox vaccine before, the bio-terror attack.
etc.
shop around, call around get a plan together before the emergency.
I agree that a professional's primary concern is the Pateint, however the bible thumpers are acting on what they believe is best for the patient.
-----signature-----
I don't like the donkeys and I don't like the Elephants http://www.lp.org "Some people never have anything except ideas Go Do it! Lucky Numbers 3, 11, 21, 31, 41, 43"
|
Locked Topic |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Lord_Vivec
Registered:
Apr '06
|
Date Posted:
1/21 7:19pm
Subject:
RE: Survey: Doctors' personal beliefs can hinder care
- Date Edited:
1/21 7:19pm (1 edits total)
Edited By:
Lord_Vivec
|
Master_SweetPea posted:
Lord_Vivec posted:
I don't think you should be telling a pharmacist what his/her primary concern is. After all, MSP is the pharmacist.
uhm...actually I'm the Technician, but I'll be the Pharmacist in about 5 years. (4 years of school, 1 year of residency)
The point remains.
-----signature-----
EUS Vice Chancellor
Do you enjoy pajamas?
Obama/Biden '08
|
Locked Topic |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
