kbordson

Firstly ... they're BRATS. Next... for REAL good brats - boil them first in beer (1can beer for 2quarts water), then grill them. mmmm...... Brats...... oh and finally.... it is wonderful that she brought them to you. Sometime good deeds get rightfully rewarded.

I mentioned it to both practices that I was considering. The reason was that I wanted to be honest about who they were hiring. Both knew that this is the person that I am and I will not change who I am to work with their group. And now that I tweaked my ankle a touch... I can and say "you knew that when I joined." Also, with being up front on the initial interview, they have ABSOLUTELY no right to "ask" that I quit for the sake of the practice.

You and I seem to have different beliefs not just on healthcare but on life in general. I believe that I have the RESPONSIBILITY to plan for my future. I decide whether I retire nicely or live impoverished. To that end, I worked HARD in school. I obtained scholarships (my family didn't have the money for college). I postponed medical school until I could afford it. I had goals that I aimed for and achieved. In contrast, my older sister CHOSE to be a carnie (work at the carnivals) for about 10-15 years.... she CHOSE to live the gypsy lifestyle..... she CHOSE to do drugs.... she CHOSE to not plan for her future. It's not that she COULDN'T hold a "reasonable" job (she is as smart as I am, National Honor Society and all that).... she just didn't WANT to. She got pregnant and was on medicaid. The government stepped in and helped her. But then Mr. and Mrs. John Doe were paying for HER DECISIONS to not plan ahead. Now... I'm not going to fault her for making decisions to live the life that SHE WANTED. We each get that choice. But, BE AN ADULT and accept responsibility for those decisions. It's the whiny mantra of "IT'S NOT FAIR" and "MY LIFE IS SO ROUGH. THE GOVERNMENT NEEDS TO HELP ME." that really pisses me off. I just did a search for health insurance if I had to buy my own. These are quotes specific for me and my current location: Blue Cross/Blue Shield - $158/mos with a $1000 annual deductible. Humana - $131/mos. with a $2500 deductible. Aetana - $98/mos with a $5000 deductible. Those costs are not unreasonable. But, you have to research and submit... Instead of just wanting big brother to take care of you. I do NOT WANT government control. Not cuz I'm "greedy" or "seppo," rather because I want to be RESPONSIBLE for MY LIFE. (and I expect others to step up to that level of responsibility as well)

Is capitalist medicine better than socialised medicine IYO? Yes. I've seen socialized medicine while I was in the military. It sucks worse. The people expect ridiculous services (a CT scan for bumping his head with the video recorder because "I'm not paying for it") and they want it NOW. You can't get that in a rationed system. As you should know. Your government decides who is "appropriate" for care, not the doctors. And I have quoted prior references to that effect. If you are "too sick," the government stops your dialysis. Or in England, it prevents you from getting certain types of chemotherapy (another reference that I have already posted) Or limits on the MRI's to diagnose. You refer to our system as "capitalist" but that is an inaccurate statement. Our healthcare has private insurance AND medicaid/medicare for those UNABLE. A two tiered system.... Kinda like most "socialized" medicine. Granted our system is reversed. It assumes that a RESPONSIBLE ADULT will make choices that look out for his/her future - have a job, have life/health/disability insurance, save to a 401k or other savings for retirement. PLAN for YOUR future. Don't expect everybody else to take care of you for your lack of forethought. But if you do have situations where you CAN'T work, or where bills become extreme, then the government DOES step in with support (medicare/medicaid). More might fall through the cracks here if they aren't really "poor" just aren't planning. And I'm glad that you think you're so smart that you understand your system. But I still don't think you truly do. You understand that you don't have to pay... thats all you need/want to know.

"Disowning" to me means no longer acknowledging the child as yours, not just cutting off support - financial, material and emotional. If the child does something (drug addictions for example) and as a parent, money is pulled so as not to enable that behavior. That is not disowning. Then the child starts stealing from parents so as a consequence, the child is kicked out and material support is removed. That is still not disowning. Then if the child tries to manipulate with guilt in an attempt to regain that necessary funding and support.... the parent has to set limits on those emotion - "I still love you Susie, but I can not support this until you get help." That still is not disowning. Sometimes being a parent is really tough. But "disowning" a child should be something that no parents ever should do (except maybe Dahlmers mom.... but even then... she probably still loves him)

If you don't get a response... please consider calling 212.577.8293 about donations to Safe Horizon, or some different domestic abuse shelter. Sometimes those women show up at the door with just their children and the clothes that they left with. They would ABSOLUTELY appreciate some clothes waiting for them when they got there.

WONDERFUL!! It's always a nice surprise to see friends!

Road Trip

Congratulations you two! May you have such the adventure!

Well... Elphaba was commonly misunderstood. . Yes, it isn't easy being green. The real problem is that the legal climate has forced physicians and surgeons into such a defensive posture. It doesn't have anything to do with who is paying. That probably is a BIG part of the problem. One of the benefits with the New Zealand system is the limitations on litigation . . . but that would not fly here. And I don't know exactly how to think about that. On one hand - there are some doctors out there that aren't doing things appropriately and people do end up getting hurt. They deserve to be held accountable for their actions. But there's a difference between true malpractice (responding to a call under the influence of alcohol) vs. medicine/practice that might have been done different by an "expert witness." I think that the "American Dream" has become too guided by MONEY as a marker for success and one quick way to get that is to sue someone (even my own family has fallen to that mindset). Medicine (especially obstetrics) is notorious for it's malpractice risks. We are basically told "You will be sued." and that it's just a matter of practicing long enough. And that kinda scares the be-gebbers out of me.

Well... Elphaba was commonly misunderstood. My "wishes" were based on knowledge of medical risks and of the current American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology (ACOG) guidelines... and the knowledge that she does have the choice.... but then if something bad happened also had the choice to sue me (and even appropriate education and signing a consent can fall by the way side if I "allow" her to step outside of the ACOG guidlelines. . . her lawyer can still sue and likely even WIN! "But Dr. Bordson, don't the guidelines state. . . ." and "yes, but she WANTED TO" doesn't cut it as an excuse.) My "wish" is just to help people and NOT lose everything for patients "poor" decisions.

My "wishes" were not wanting a uterine ruupture and a dead baby, which is the risk that she was definately taking. She had had two (TWO) prior cesarean section deliveries. Most hospitals and physicians would not even allow her to attempt vaginal birth after two prior c-sections. It's not a "God complex" issue, it's a risk assessment issue. If the uterus ruptures, the baby could die. Her "wish" to have natural delivery was counter to my "wish" to have a safe and healthy delivery. I allowed spontaneous labor UNTIL she stopped progressing. Then after FOUR hours of not making any progress and still contracting, testing that uterine scar every 3-4min with a new contraction, my "wish" is to stop gambling with the babies life. I do take risks... but don't like it when people risk killing their babies on my shift. edit to add: she was an eligible candidate and HAD she continued in an appropriate pattern, all would have been fine. But when she stopped dilating... and made NO change.... AND the baby didn't like the labor.... then I don't like the situation. And just as patients are able to decide what care they want, doctors should be allowed to say "this is what I recommend - if you don't like it, here are other physicians" BUT in this case.... NO-ONE would want to do what she was wanting due to the risks (and yes, I do understand that the risk is only 1:300... but that number goes up with protracted or arrest of labor... there was a REASON that she wasn't dilating)

I ABSOLUTELY agree to disagree because even though you might live there, I don't think you understand or appropriately represent your countries system. Nor do I believe you understand the American system. Hell, I'm IN IT and don't assume to state that really understand it. And I honestly think that you are misrepresenting the situation with your friend in an attempt to vilify the American Healthcare system. But... these are all MY opinions. I'm choosing to defend my country and my profession, just as you would if someone was attacking skydiving in New Zealand. Are there problems, yes. You would have to be illiterate to not have read that in this thread... but I DO NOT BELIEVE that socialized medicine is the answer.

Yeah... cuz I have a "God complex" She comes to the hospital for care. Recieves recommendations. Refuses to follow those recommendations. But yet still has the ability to sue regardless of the outcome. And I have the attitude?! Try again.

This is per YOUR GOVERNMENTS website. source

Another point is PATIENT AUTONOMY. Right now, I am waiting on labor and delivery and allowing a patient to do something that I, in my professional opinion, don't agree with. I have counselled her on her options. Told her what I think is most medically safe for her and her baby. She is CHOOSING to act opposite of my wishes. Legal implications? HUGE! Either way. I do the procedure and something happens - "I didn't want it." I allow her to act against medical judgment - "I didn't know." So... here is a perfect example of the ATTITUDE that is the problem. She is on medicaid (FREE healthcare to her) making demands that compormise the physicians future.

1. I can take care of it all. 2. I know everything. 3. I played euchre with a dragon this morning. 4. Gravity stopped. 5. I've got tickets to see Billy Shakes at The Rose. 6. I counted to infinity twice during lunch

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Name some.

I don't know.... looks to me like he's getting some tail.

Now call me a commie conspiracy theorist, but I just watched 'Sicko' the new Michael Moore film and it points out exactly the points I was trying to get at about this subject. What are your thoughts on this film. Looked pretty black and white to me. besides... that movie doesn't counter the fact that if I get hurt in NZ, I do NOT get free care as you have been stating. The websites sponsored by your country are a bit more reliable as a source of reference than Michael Moore.

I've seen that movie. Some points, but most of it a spectacular MOVIE and complete lack of journalistic integrity. Michael Moore has no respect from me. Quoting him gets you no brownie points or style credit. Sense and nonsense from Sicko. By Ronald M. Davis, MD The above link is an eloquent discussion of the faults of the film.

My thoughts are that those elitist with attitudes need to realize that REAL "non poser douche bag" skydivers live on a REAL dropzone . . . not in Wisconsin.

And I'm a PIRATE!!! (even though I live in the middle of the country... and my boat is not really "piratey".... and I don't much plunder or pillage....)

sniff sniff

Very interesting link. Thank you for sharing that. I think that our defination of what is "reality" is very limiting. Just because we don't see or hear or feel the same sensations.... just because we don't understand what is being done or why.... doesn't make it any less of a reality for others. It's rather arrogant to label them as "abnormal" when we don't really understand "normal."