Law: Meta-Blog

March 15, 2008

At some point I fully intend to review the rest of my callback interviews.  For now, I just wanted to respond to a could of IM’s I received and throw a comment to Kurzman.

First, for Kurzman, thanks for pointing out the stupidity of that comment.  I think that we have tried pretty hard to make it clear that this is a joint-blog (See, e.g., the fact that we title our posts “law” or “med” and reference each other).  Anyway, I certainly get long winded and ramble, especially when I make political blog posts.  If that bugs you, feel free to leave a comment.  Better yet, point out what you find particularly stupid.  Either way, at least understand what the blog is about.

Also, a few people have sent me some IM’s to the effect of “don’t you get it, Kurzman’s class was using those facts for ethical analysis, not legal analysis.”  I don’t know where this comes from.  Yes I get it.  I wasn’t researching the case to find some legal critique of what Kurzman’s class decided, I was looking it up so I could read the facts and see 1. what the facts were 2. If there was anything missing from Kurzman’s fact summary that I think would change a person’s view 3. What the facts that the case was unspecific about were. 

Yes I also talked about the legal reason for the decision as opposed to the ethical implications.  The reason for this was to point out how lawyers and doctors approach the same question from very different points of view.  Kurzman’s class was focused on the ethical issues involved, but discussed the legal conclusion.  What I was asserting at the end of my last post was merely that from the court’s point of view, there was no “ethical” or “moral” issue to even look at.  There was on point legal history that the court applied. 

Perhaps what I should have done was assert that the class discuss the less sexy Johnson case that was relied on heavily in the analysis of the case Kurzman’s course actually used.

Anyway, that’s what I was trying to do.  Later this week I plan to summarize some of my callbacks and catch you up on my life.  Perhaps I’ll even find some time to go to class. 

Advertisements

2 Responses to “Law: Meta-Blog”

  1. kurzman85 said

    Hey bud,

    Thanks for doing the heavy-lifting on that case below. They presented it to us in a VERY abbreviated form, as evidenced by all of the additional and, more importantly, pertinent information you found about it.

    Like I said in my post, I didn’t really feel that comfortable when I first read that he got off on the GS. I allowed myself to be swayed by my classmates, but your extra research seems to affirm my earlier opinion.

    One could make an argument and say that EACH instance of him running him qualifies as a *new* emergency–but I think thats a load of BS. If you had just been introduced to a complicated delivery while being one of the only OBs around, I think you have some responsibility to learn about the case–and he did have some time because he went back to the lounge to chill. Furthermore–as you discovered–he had performed physical exams.

    It’s not like we let ER docs get away with practicing bad medicine even though EVERY situation they face is an emergency.

    I still hold that the lawyers might have wanted to go after the absent docs, but I just cannot say that I don’t think this guy did something wrong–or at the very least, that he should have been able to use GS. Maybe he didn’t commit malpractice, but he wasn’t being a good samaritan either.

  2. kurzman85 said

    And for the record, I had no problem whatsoever with how you approached the post–the legal facts were the missing piece. So, thanks. 🙂

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: