[Grovenet] Extremist Revolutionaries and other confusion...

Ron D'Eau Claire ron at cobi.biz
Thu Jun 30 17:31:20 PDT 2005


Michael wrote:
So are you suggesting the British would've surrendered heir American
colonies in the face of a "legitimate poll?"

-----------
Not a bit. King George was no different that President George Walker B.
Neither one does "focus groups". 

I was thinking of the process by which someone with a radical idea finds out
if there's adequate popular support for it among those who need to sign on.
That's what happened that brought the colonies into revolt, of course. The
"ruling group" here in the colonies - those with the influence to dictate to
the populous - came to enough of an agreement about what had to happen that
the revolution was on. Nowadays with every character on  the street putting
his/her oar in the water on darn near every decision, George Gallup or the
ballot box does that for us. Of course we don't like to think about it much
but the ruling groups are still here, out of sight. 

Thanks for the medical recap. I missed that before. I suspect the first item
is tough. Doctors can sue too. After all, being dumped from their job
doesn't mean that they can easily switch to something else that will pay off
the huge investment they have. I suspect that's why most doctors are very
cautious about blaming others - the old bit about messing with rocks in
glass houses...

My comments about "suggests" were meant to point out that as far as I can
see evaluating the real extent and causes of the injuries suffered by
doctors is not an exact process. After all, medicine is an art as much as it
is science. Perhaps more. The safest thing for a doctor to do is nothing.
He'll never cause harm that way by his acts. 

Based on the doctors I have known, I am still very concerned by the pace
they keep. Maybe, like train engineers, airline pilots and truck drivers, we
need to put a limit on how much they are allowed to do without a break. 

I have a surgeon friend who took over a trauma center at a hospital in New
Mexico about five years ago. It kept him literally running 12 to 16 hours at
a time, sometimes with half a dozen critical patients all at the same time
almost side-by-side. Sometimes he has no chance to sit down, much less eat,
during his shift. 

He did it because he said that it was actually less hectic and tiring than
the daily schedule he had to keep in the wards. 

Ron D'Eau Claire 



-----Original Message-----
From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com] On
Behalf Of Michael O'Brien
Sent: Thursday, June 30, 2005 4:00 PM
To: Forest Grove local interests list
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Extremist Revolutionaries and other confusion...


At 02:39 PM 6/30/2005, Ron D'Eau Claire wrote:
>All the people you listed are, in my view, revolutionaries.

If I understand you correctly, we agree:  dire circumstances breed 
revolutions, some of them good and necessary (like our own), others harmful 
(like bin Laden's).  It all depends on the goals and ideology of the 
revolutionaries, right?

Ron also sez:  "But do we need them to define the middle? What's wrong with 
the ballot box... Or any sort of legitimate poll?"

So are you suggesting the British would've surrendered their American 
colonies in the face of a "legitimate poll?"  Or that the South would've 
abandoned slavery if the slave states had lost some national referendum?  I 
don't follow your argument here.  While I strongly share your preference 
for bringing change through a peaceful democratic process, history shows 
that it's not always possible.  And "moderation" is always in the eye of 
the beholder.  I suspect most Grovenuts believe that their political views 
represent the real interests of the majority.

Then:  "If your premise that there is a very high incidence of malpractice 
is true, how do we fix it?"

This goes back to a thread that's now ancient by Grovenet standards.  The 
problem with the "malpractice crisis" isn't just medical negligence.  At 
the risk of repeating myself, some of the solutions that have been proposed 
include:

o  The medical associations can do a better job of policing themselves by 
disciplining or excluding members who have a history of negligently 
injuring their patients.  Hospitals can remove doctors with a history of 
malpractice from their staffs, and HMO's can do the same.

o  Persons injured by malpractice should have access to health insurance 
and income maintenance during periods of long-term disability, which for 
many can last a lifetime.  Then they'd be less likely to resort to 
litigation, with all its related expenses, delays and uncertainties.

o  State regulators could do a better job of examining the rate structures 
of malpractice carriers to see whether recent large increases in premiums 
can be justified.  (The insurance industry, being a form of gambling, has 
always been subject to government supervision.)

o  No caps on jury awards.  As noted in one of my sources, the caps would 
undermine the important policy goals of "compensation and deterrence," 
along with the constitutional right to trial by jury.

Finally, Ron challenged (in an earlier post) my use of the word "suggests" 
to describe some of the results of the Harvard study on physician 
errors.  My cited source used the word "extrapolates," which means about 
the same thing.  If the temperature in Forest Grove, Banks and Hillsboro is 
between 70 and 75, that data "suggests" it's likely to be about the same in 
Cornelius.  I was using the term in that sense.

Michael

_______________________________________________
GroveNet mailing list
GroveNet at rdrop.com http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet






More information about the GroveNet mailing list