←back to thread

My dad could still be alive, but he's not

(www.jenn.site)
367 points DustinEchoes | 2 comments | 13 Nov 25 02:17 UTC | HN request time: 0.001s | source
Show context
ugh123 ◴[13 Nov 25 02:41 UTC] No.45909860[source]▶
>my dad is dead, because his family members were too naive to know that the thing they were instructed to do by the state was a false thing.

We're told a lot of things by "officials" not because it's correct, but because it holds the least legal liability for official parties involved, especially anything involving healthcare. These officials also sometimes include doctors, who work to protect themselves and the system first, and then patients.

replies(5): >>45909909 #>>45909954 #>>45909988 #>>45910116 #>>45910233 #
energy123 ◴[13 Nov 25 02:59 UTC] No.45909988[source]▶
Incompetence and laziness among doctors is a big cause. As a professional you've probably worked with many colleagues you thought were bad. Well there are doctors like that too. Many of them. And unlike in tech, they don't get let go if they're bad. They stay around and keep "treating" patients.
replies(3): >>45910054 #>>45910068 #>>45910734 #
photon_lines ◴[13 Nov 25 03:10 UTC] No.45910068[source]▶
This is 100% true, especially in Canada. I've had multiple encounters with doctors who were not fit for their positions and should not have been working as doctors. One of them nearly killed my mom, and another one was suspended due to malpractice and performing research fraud, but was given her license back and is back to work at the moment. Yes she is fully licensed and back to working as a regular MD in Canada: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sophie_Jamal
replies(1): >>45910150 #
bonsai_spool ◴[13 Nov 25 03:20 UTC] No.45910150[source]▶
> One of them nearly killed my mom, and another one was suspended due to malpractice and performing research fraud, but was given her license back

How does alleged research fraud affect someone’s ability to be a caregiver?

replies(4): >>45910190 #>>45910264 #>>45910525 #>>45910541 #
photon_lines ◴[13 Nov 25 03:25 UTC] No.45910190[source]▶
She blamed the research fraud on her assistant when she was initially accused of it and denied all liabilities. She only admitted to it after they had her cornered. I had her as my endocrinologist for a while and I would not recommend her. Edit: if you want to have a care-taker who doesn't mind lying or is a psychopath, you do you but it's a no go for me.
replies(1): >>45910443 #
bonsai_spool ◴[13 Nov 25 03:58 UTC] No.45910443[source]▶
> if you want to have a care-taker who doesn't mind lying or is a psychopath, you do you but it's a no go for me.

We've gone from accused of research fraud to psychopath.

My original point is that I don't see how the effort to produce new knowledge has any bearing on the appropriate management of diabetes/thyroid hormone.

replies(3): >>45910532 #>>45910543 #>>45910681 #
pertymcpert ◴[13 Nov 25 04:37 UTC] No.45910681{4}[source]▶
You don’t see how being a dishonest person committing research fraud should disqualify you from treating patients?
replies(1): >>45910699 #
1. bonsai_spool ◴[13 Nov 25 04:39 UTC] No.45910699{5}[source]▶
> You don’t see how being a dishonest person committing research fraud should disqualify you from treating patients?

Correct. And, a panel of this person's peers found that, in fact, the alleged research fraud should not disqualify the person from treating patients.

replies(1): >>45911303 #
2. pertymcpert ◴[13 Nov 25 06:08 UTC] No.45911303[source]▶
It certainly wasn’t unanimous. I generally hold my doctors to a higher ethical standard given they’re dealing with people’s lives. Maybe you have lower standards.