Another hospital calls CPS on parents who question routine medical procedures

[Cajuncowboy]

End of discussion, above in bold, red, underlined.

They lied and said the baby was in POSSIBLE DANGER!



THEY LIED!


End of discussion, above in bold, red underlined.

 

[Cajuncowboy]

Because it wasn't. It was a hospital taking what they felt was the best and most logical course of action in ensuring that they satisfied the duty of care in the face of potential liability for or claims of medical malpractice. Whether it looks good or not from a PR standpoint, or whether it was the best thing to do given the circumstances is unknown, since none of us were there.

What we have here is another classic case of people allowing emotions to cloud judgment in examining a situation at face value from an objective position. It's funny to me.

No, what we have here are some over litigious people who think they have it all under figured out. I'm not sure what the malpractice suit would be about. Giving the baby a bath? Really? Or to give the vitamin via a shot or liquid? I swear some people don't use common sense any more. There was NOTHING wrong with the baby. There was no impending medical emergency. They had done your precious duty of care and there was no issues other than a professional disagreement over procedure. The family has a right to take the child if there is no problem with the it and go and seek treatment if warranted from another facility if they choose.

This is simply ludicrous and was an egregious trampling of parents rights.

 

[CowboyMcCoy]

Again. BS. There was no danger to the child therefor the care was provided to ensure the baby was fine. You can label this whatever you want but it is an overreach by an entity that has no right to do so. The hospital was out of line and it appears since the father was the former chief if staff that someone wanted to throw their weight around and show him who was boss. So none of your "duty of care" BS means anything.

Hospitals step over the line very often and I don't agree with you often, but I think we're on the same page regarding this. The duty of care is ambiguous, so the pedophile-ridden-abuse-harboring CPS abuses it because that's where you find a large percentage of pedophiles per person, per capita, within CPS. They love being around children. They love taking yours because you questioned if injecting them was necessary when it could as easily be ingested. The thing people don't see is, while there is a need for CPS, it is ran worse than FEMA and is a total joke of an excuse for actually protecting kids.

Anyone arguing duty of care isn't being realistic here and so logic be damned and your whole life too. They care not--off to the next victim.

 

[CowboyMcCoy]

Umm, the baby was not in danger. The birth went smoothly according to the article. I have had several run-ins with over bearing doctors insisting they shoot my kids up with all sort of crap vaccines of dubious merit. I am not referring to mumps or measles, TB etc, but the laundry list on "new" ones they insist upon. I know from experience what some of these "new" vaccines can do to children. My son has suffered as a result. Having an MD after your name impresses me less and less every year.

Heaven forbid an educated person question an MD....

Anyway, some of the comments in this thread actually give me hope.

 

[CowboyMcCoy]

Well the Facts are...
The baby was not in any danger.
The father was a doctor himself.
The father disagreed with a vaccine.
The hospital got upset that he didn't acquiesce to their demands.
The father was the former chief of staff at THAT hospital.
The hospital said the baby was in possible danger leading the cps to think something could be wrong when it was obviously not..

Yes, they overstepped the bounds.

Someone is paying attention. Rest assured this happens a lot. The only reason this case got publicity is BECAUSE of the fact the guy was the former chief of staff at that hospital.

 

[Cajuncowboy]

Someone is paying attention. Rest assured this happens a lot. The only reason this case got publicity is BECAUSE of the fact the guy was the former chief of staff at that hospital.

An obvious fact that is lost on some people in this thread.

 

[CowboyMcCoy]

An obvious fact that is lost on some people in this thread.

I think maybe so. All I'm asking is for people to pay attention to these issues. If we're basing our opinions of evil things being those things that have abused, molested, drugged, killed an neglected more children than any abusive parent, then look at the facts. No entity abuses more kids than CPS. No one.

 

[The30YardSlant]

Sayingthat the father being a doctor is irrrelevent destroys your whole arguement since then it would be called a professional disagreement.

Legally it is irrelevent, he is no different than any other patient or in this case father of a patient.

 

[The30YardSlant]

Hospitals step over the line very often and I don't agree with you often, but I think we're on the same page regarding this. The duty of care is ambiguous, so the pedophile-ridden-abuse-harboring CPS abuses it because that's where you find a large percentage of pedophiles per person, per capita, within CPS. They love being around children. They love taking yours because you questioned if injecting them was necessary when it could as easily be ingested. The thing people don't see is, while there is a need for CPS, it is ran worse than FEMA and is a total joke of an excuse for actually protecting kids.

Anyone arguing duty of care isn't being realistic here and so logic be damned and your whole life too. They care not--off to the next victim.

You're attempting to speak intelligently about fields in which you have absolutely no educational or professional knowledge of (law and medicine).

Meanwhile, professionals in both fields are sitting here telling you that you are wrong. Nothing like bashing your own head against a brick wall.

 

[Cajuncowboy]

Legally it is irrelevent, he is no different than any other patient or in this case father of a patient.

The parent has a right to choose what care the child gets as long as it doesn't endanger the child. It is OBVIOUS that the child was NOT in any danger as the hospital said. So it is relevant in that he wasn't just some parent with no background.

 

[Cajuncowboy]

You're attempting to speak intelligently about fields in which you have absolutely no educational or professional knowledge of (law and medicine).

Meanwhile, professionals in both fields are sitting here telling you that you are wrong. Nothing like bashing your own head against a brick wall.

On one hand you talk about "professionals" telling us we are wrong yet you ignore the professional doctor that was the baby's father.

I would take the baby's father's word over it before anyone on this forum since no one on this forum is the baby's father. The hospital had no right to over step it's bounds. Families have a right to determine care when there is no danger.

Further, it is these "professionals" (read lawyers) who have put us in this situation with their over litigiousness and suing for every little thing. So if you are going to take up their legal perspective, then you have to deal with the fact they are the evil scientists who created the monster.

 

[casmith07]

You're attempting to speak intelligently about fields in which you have absolutely no educational or professional knowledge of (law and medicine).

Meanwhile, professionals in both fields are sitting here telling you that you are wrong. Nothing like bashing your own head against a brick wall.

Slant did I read correctly before that you were in medical school?

 

[CowboyMcCoy]

You're attempting to speak intelligently about fields in which you have absolutely no educational or professional knowledge of (law and medicine).

Meanwhile, professionals in both fields are sitting here telling you that you are wrong. Nothing like bashing your own head against a brick wall.

This coming from an Aggie who we've seen spill stupidity over the board time and time again....

 

[CowboyMcCoy]

On one hand you talk about "professionals" telling us we are wrong yet you ignore the professional doctor that was the baby's father.

Stop it. That doesn't work for his argument.

I would take the baby's father's word over it before anyone on this forum since no one on this forum is the baby's father. The hospital had no right to over step it's bounds. Families have a right to determine care when there is no danger.

Stop it. He's a lawyer and a doctor already.

Further, it is these "professionals" (read lawyers) who have put us in this situation with their over litigiousness and suing for every little thing. So if you are going to take up their legal perspective, then you have to deal with the fact they are the evil scientists who created the monster.

On top of it all, he's telling me I have no insight on the topic....

 

[JD_KaPow]

The parent has a right to choose what care the child gets as long as it doesn't endanger the child. It is OBVIOUS that the child was NOT in any danger as the hospital said. So it is relevant in that he wasn't just some parent with no background.

Yes, it is perfectly obvious from reading a column written by a person who read a newspaper article in which the parents were quoted but the hospital declined to comment on an ongoing situation - clearly, we know everything there is to know about exactly what happened.

 

[Cajuncowboy]

Yes, it is perfectly obvious from reading a column written by a person who read a newspaper article in which the parents were quoted but the hospital declined to comment on an ongoing situation - clearly, we know everything there is to know about exactly what happened.

Well, let's put it this way, What we know is that since the child wasn't taken away or the CPS didn't mandate the baby go back to the hospital, we know the baby wasn't in danger. So clearly we know the hospital over reacted.

 

[Hoofbite]

Total absolute BS. Sayingthat the father being a doctor is irrrelevent destroys your whole arguement since then it would be called a professional disagreement.

Your definition of reasonable is one reason the system is broken.

First do no harm.

You like hoof ignore that.

They did cause harm and they will end up costing the hospital.

It was a stupid and arrogant decision and they should be held accountable.

You have absolutely no clue what you are talking about.

 

[casmith07]

I just read the remainder of the article.

I can't believe anyone would defend these people. They're probably the same people who don't believe in immunizations against infectious diseases.

 

[CowboyMcCoy]

I just read the remainder of the article.

I can't believe anyone would defend these people. They're probably the same people who don't believe in immunizations against infectious diseases.

You must've skipped the beginning where the father was actually the ex chief of staff...

And of course the hospital declined to comment. That's bad for business...

Well, let's put it this way, What we know is that since the child wasn't taken away or the CPS didn't mandate the baby go back to the hospital, we know the baby wasn't in danger. So clearly we know the hospital over reacted.

At least someone at the hospital overreacted. That much is clear. Guess what? The baby is ok...

 

[JBond]

I just read the remainder of the article.


I can't believe anyone would defend these people. They're probably the same people who don't believe in immunizations against infectious diseases.

You can not believe someone would defend a doctor that does not want his kid to have unnecessary shots? That is silly and short sighted.

Oh...I know lets call the government, because they always do the right thing. The government is the only group that is capable of knowing what is best for your child.

I am amazed you think that government agents needed to be called because a doctor wanted his kid to take and oral medication as opposed to a shot.

What is wrong with people these days? We are from the government and we are here to help you stupid little people...Only the government knows best. Shut up and do what we say or we will steal your child.

CPS? Really? Child protective services needed to called because a doctor wanted his child to take an oral vitamin instead of a shot? This thread is full of fools that have no business being parents. I would hate to be as inept as the folks that need the government to tell them how to raise their kid.

Damn lawyers are ruining this country.