It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by oneclickaway
Let's all of us cease writing and making opinions on anything then, as all we are basing it on is news stories or articles and we were not there. Not sure that argument holds much weight. I think if you read that entire article then intent becomes clearer.
Again: I would support the doctors for not allowing my elderly relative to suffer. If an intern tries to stop doctors from making extreme decisions in extreme circumstances - - he is creating a problem.
Originally posted by uplander
...
Of course it would have been better to get them out of there. If you had read my post you would have seen that I said that. But that didn't happen. Of course there were screw ups with the evacuations. DUH! But since that didn't happen this Dr. was put in a terrible position and he did what he thought was right. Some may not like his tone when he states this, but I admire him for stating the facts and not lying about it or just flat out ignoring the inquiry.
Pittman Construction Company, Inc. (Pittman, the Contractor, or Appellant), was awarded Contract No. DACW29-93-C-008 by the US Army Corps of Engineers, New Orleans District (the Government or Respondent) in the amount of $2,564,264. The contract was entitled "Lake Ponchartrain LA. & Vicinity, Hurricane Protection Project, High Level Plan, 17th St. Outfall Canal Flood Protection Improvement Project, Capping of Floodwalls, East Side Improvements, Orleans Parish, LA." The work required Pittman to construct three types of floodwalls along the 17th Street Canal New Orleans, Louisiana: Type 1; Type II, and Type III. During construction of the Type I floodwall, the Contractor experienced problems with movement of the monoIiths beyond the tolerance specified by the contract.
It is Pittman's contention that the lack of structural integrity of the existing sheet pile around which the concrete was poured, and relative weakness of the soils, permitted the concrete to shift during construction, resulting in monoliths that were not in alignment as quired by the contract. The Appellant subsequently Filed a claim seeking additional compensation in the amount of $809,659 and a time extension of eighty days. Following the Contracting Officer's denial of its claim, Pittman filed this timely appeal.
On April 4,1997, with the Board's approval, the parties entered into an agreement to resolve the appeal by means of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR), using the Board's nonappealable, Summary Binding Trial procedure. The parties filed position papers setting forth, in their respective opinions, the essential facts and issues of the matter. A pretrial conference was conducted, providing the parries with what is essentially an "early neutral evaluation" in ADR parlance; this gave the parties a limited opportunity to present their positions and to address procedural aspects of the upcoming trial. The Summary Binding Trial was held on April 21-22,1997, in New Orleans.
...
Each of the legal theones propounded by Pittman to support its contention that the additional costs should be borne by the Government (including differing site condition, defective specifications, superior knowledge, an alleged breach of the Government's duty to cooperate, and that the Government assumed responsibility for successful use of the cofferdam by approving certain submittals) carries with it an essential element of the burden of proof that Pittman has not met. This Appeal is DENIED in its entirety.
Date: February 17,1998
[signature]
REBA PAGE
Administrative Judge
Member, Corps of Engineers
Board of Contract Appeals
I swear by Apollo Physician and Asclepius and Hygieia and Panaceia and all the gods, and goddesses, making them my witnesses, that I will fulfil according to my ability and judgment this oath and this covenant:
To hold him who has taught me this art as equal to my parents and to live my life in partnership with him, and if he is in need of money to give him a share of mine, and to regard his offspring as equal to my brothers in male lineage and to teach them this art–if they desire to learn it–without fee and covenant; to give a share of precepts and oral instruction and all the other learning to my sons and to the sons of him who has instructed me and to pupils who have signed the covenant and have taken the oath according to medical law, but to no one else.
I will apply dietic measures for the benefit of the sick according to my ability and judgment; I will keep them from harm and injustice.
I will neither give a deadly drug to anybody if asked for it, nor will I make a suggestion to this effect. Similarly I will not give to a woman an abortive remedy. In purity and holiness I will guard my life and my art.
I will not use the knife, not even on sufferers from stone, but will withdraw in favor of such men as are engaged in this work.
Whatever houses I may visit, I will come for the benefit of the sick, remaining free of all intentional injustice, of all mischief and in particular of sexual relations with both female and male persons, be they free or slaves.
What I may see or hear in the course of treatment or even outside of the treatment in regard to the life of men, which on no account one must spread abroad, I will keep myself holding such things shameful to be spoken about.
If I fulfill this oath and do not violate it, may it be granted to me to enjoy life and art, being honored with fame among all men for all time to come; if I transgress it and swear falsely, may the opposite of all this be my lot.
"It was hot, over 100 degrees, four nurses were trapped on the floor caring for her, and we could not get her down," he told The Associated Press.
Originally posted by oneclickaway
reply to post by Annee
Wow....wow....unbelievable. The intern was the only one in that place with a conscience and Morality.
Originally posted by nixie_nox
reply to post by Rams59lb
If I was 80 years old or crippled and couldn't get out on my own, I would tell that doctor to fill me up and let me go. I had lived my life and that staff needed to go save younger people and themselves.
Originally posted by A Fortiori
reply to post by Rams59lb
Have you seen Children of Chernobyl? There is this scene in the documentary where the doctor is speaking very harshly and coldly with the parents, then he turns the corner and is clearly distraught and emotional.
Perhaps, it was a "brave front"? Maybe he has regrets but has to tell himself daily that he did the right thing?
Honestly, I believe that humans have outgrown their environment to the point where we can only be depressed, stressed, or angry.
The ancients had a difficult life, no doubt, but they didn't have the stress of driving in rush hour traffic, of paying bills, of being "available" at all times. They also didn't have to answer life and death questions with so many "what ifs"? Parents would look at babies for their viability and make a decision. It was part of daily life. Soldiers would look at each other's wounds and make a decision. Death and life were brothers. The afterworld to the ancients was better than this place so the guilt of taking a life was removed.
Terry Schiavo's mother would have grieved when her daughter died from the original seizure. She would have mourned her and lived the rest of her life knowing her daughter was in peace. Instead she lived in limbo, hoping she would "wake up" and talk to her again, that the flickering eye movements meant something. What a terrible burden for a mother to bear.
I'm not arguing against life support. I would certainly put my child on it because I could never ever let go of my child. It's terrible to say but I would hold out hope to the end that she would come back to me, somehow.
One hundred years ago I wouldn't have to make this decision.
I hate the complexity of modern life. I wish there was some new planet to go to without technology. *sighs*
Am I missing something? Because I don't find this a terrible thing from what I've read.
Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
Am I missing something? Because I don't find this a terrible thing from what I've read.
Originally posted by uplander
What would you rather had happened to those poor people there who could not get out? Would you rather the Dr. die with them? Or would you rather they were left there to die in the mud? Can you imagine the horror that would be? Lying in a bed, not able to help yourself, all sane people having already left, alone, to suffocate in water and mud as it inched up your face?
Originally posted by chuckk
Excuse me... This was a 6-STORY HOSPITAL. Just had to move patients off the first floor to stay out of the water.
Originally posted by Annee
Move them how?
Wheel their beds and all their life saving equipment by elevator?
Originally posted by Blueangel7
gang-type people were banging on the door and trying to get in to steal drugs....
Originally posted by truth/seeker
reply to post by Rams59lb
under Obama care the government will decide who will live, and who will
die, and they decide when, not you or family
Originally posted by Exuberant1
Originally posted by Blueangel7
gang-type people were banging on the door and trying to get in to steal drugs....
"Gang-type"
Just come out and say it: Black people were in need of medical supplies and went to the place that had them
(but you think they just wanted to get high... "Gang-type people... )
[edit on 30-8-2009 by Exuberant1]