On Nov 13, 1:11=A0pm, Dan Sullivan <dsull...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> On Nov 13, 1:59=A0pm, Greegor <Greego...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Oct 24, 9:32=A0am, Dan Sullivan <dsull...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
> > > On Oct 23, 2:09=A0pm, Greegor <Greego...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
> > > > G > Betty, Do you really think that a kid
> > > > G > who is 10th percentile (5% of population)
> > > > G > would not set off huge alarm bells for
> > > > G > a doctor?
>
> > > > BW > My bad. =A0I thought he said four.
>
> > > > G > Betty, In another thread you
> > > > G > accused me a priori of MOCKING you!
> > > > G >
> > > > G > In this thread I asked a direct,
> > > > G > fair and reasonable question.
> > > > G >
> > > > G > Apparently you don't want to answer it
> > > > G > so you join in with Dan's juvenile crap.
> > > > G >
> > > > G > You MOCK yourself.
>
> > > > G > Betty, Do you really think that a kid
> > > > G > who is 10th percentile (5% of population)
> > > > G > would not set off huge alarm bells for
> > > > G > a doctor?
>
> > > What percentage of kids are in the 10th percentile, grag???
>
> > > TEN percent!
>
> > > What percentage of kids are above the 90th percentile?
>
> > > TEN percent!
>
> > > Is CPS supposed to be investigating the reasons behind 20 percent of
> > > the kids being either too heavy or too light?
>
> > > > G > Can't just answer a simple question directly?
> > > > G > If you don't KNOW, just admit you don't.
>
> > > Why don't you post what YOU know, grag.
>
> > > Post YOUR answers.
>
> > > > BW > I know the answer very well Greg.
> > > > BW > I just can't figure out why you insist
> > > > BW > on asking irrelevant questions.
> > > > BW > The article said that the girl had
> > > > BW > not been to the doctor in years.
> > > > BW > It would be impossible for those
> > > > BW > 'alarms' to be set off by someone
> > > > BW > that a doctor hasn't seen.
>
> > > > G > When the child was to the doctor years
> > > > G > before, the doctor THEN should have
> > > > G > insisted on CLOSE SUPERVISION.
> > > > G >
> > > > G > It doesn't take a SERIES of low weight
> > > > G > or a trend, if the kid is THAT LOW!
>
> > > > BW > Do you think it was the doctor's job
> > > > BW > to make sure the parents brought
> > > > BW > the girl to subsequent check ups?
>
> > > > What do the guidelines of the AMA and
> > > > pediatric association say on this?
>
> > > > Doctors ADMIT kids to hospitals for far smaller
> > > > problems than this.
>
> > > Such as?
>
> > > Post five examples of lesser reasons doctors admit kids to
hospitals.
>
> > > > Doctors also re****t to CPS for smaller problems than this.
>
> > > > I don't like the NAZI like world we've made with the
> > > > relation****p between doctor and patient with
> > > > CPS quietly in the mix. =A0I'm just pointing it out.
>
> > > > We've got doctors calling CPS on their patients
> > > > all the time, there have even been stories of how
> > > > doctors have used re****ting to CPS in an attempt
> > > > to prevent parents from getting a second opinion.
> > > > In a few cases the second opinion proved that the
> > > > first (re****ting) doctor was horribly WRONG in their
> > > > determination.
>
> > > > Hell, One of the biggest Family Rights advocates
> > > > even experiencede an ER NURSE who used CPS
> > > > at the drop of a hat in an attempt to back up or
> > > > enlarge the nurses aggrandized authority. =A0The
> > > > nurse phoned in a rediculously false re****t. =A0The
> > > > re****t included completely fictional elements
> > > > borrowed from famous national CPS cases, like
> > > > that the mother was a preacher traveling in a
> > > > BUS with her kids. =A0(Not a preacher, no bus.)
> > > > CPS (Missouri DFS) sent a newbie caseworker.
> > > > =A0When the caseworke told her superiors who
> > > > the mother was, they asked the caseworker
> > > > to apologize and LEAVE. =A0The child involved
> > > > lives with lifelong cerebral injuries as the result
> > > > of a foster care experience. =A0The mother was
> > > > doing exactly as the doctor directed,
> > > > was told to go to the ER and have him paged
> > > > immediately, but the ER nurse saw this as some
> > > > sort of challenge to her AUTHORITY so she called
> > > > CPS before she paged the doctor.
>
> > > > Remember than in many states mandatory
> > > > re****ters have to re****t situations which MIGHT
> > > > possibly be abuse, or face legal liabilities.
> > > > There is a big difference between re****ting
> > > > every damned thing that MIGHT POSSIBLY
> > > > be abuse (almost everything!) as opposed
> > > > to re****ting only where they reasonably believe
> > > > there is actual child abuse.
>
> > > > Missouri law is a bit stricter about this than most
> > > > states (thanks to the Mom above) but you
> > > > know very well that the doctors MALPRACTICE
> > > > insurer would urge them to re****t such a case
> > > > unless there is some really good explanation!
>
> > > Post any credible evidence you have of that a "MALPRACTICE insurer"
> > > would urge a doctor to re****t suspected child abuse.
>
> > > > I don't LIKE how it is, I'm just telling it.
>
> > > Tell what you know to be true?
>
> > > Or what you imagine to be true?
G > Dan, Why are you arguing about whether or not
G > CPS should be involved in underweight/overweight cases
G > when in fact CPS WAS involved in this case?
DS > I know CPS was involved.
The original news story gave no indication CPS was involved.
DS > I started this thread with the story.
Which initially cast blame only on parents.
You ""blamed"" CPS sarcastically,
But LATER we all found out CPS was heavily involved.
DS > And I stated that "CPS blew it."
G > You pointed out yourself that it was closed in 30 days!
DS > And in the title of this thread I stated "CPS blew it!"
Original news re****t you posted gave NO indication
that CPS was involved. You said that sarcastically.
LATER re****ts revealed CPS WAS involved!
G > How much weight do you think she gained in only 30 days?
DS > I don't know, do you?
DS > But weight gain is not why the CW closed the case.
Please explain, Dan!
|
