SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Sharks in the Septic Tank
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Lazarus_Long who wrote (80844)7/7/2004 9:44:02 PM
From: one_less  Read Replies (2) of 82486
 
"The widower claims his wife never mentioned or showed such a sheet to him and he never saw it. It was not found among her effects after her death."

1) Everyone knows or should know that BC is not 100%. Which person do we think was irresponsible, the Dr. who has a standard of practice which supports his claims, or a woman who has sex while she is sick?...yuck. Or, if her husband insisted, what kind of character does he have?

2) She would die if she became pregnant and they are risking it, with BC pills. Stupid... there are lots of ways to have sex without shoving sperm into her at the risk of her life.

3)It is not the Doctor's word against some one else's. The only person present was the Doctor. He says the woman was informed of the risks. Doctors say lots of things that are not documented in their notes. If there are risks associated with the BC it should be documented and delivered with the drug which the pharmacist assures us it was.

4) Anyone who takes BC or any drug without full knowledge of the risks is responsible for their own ignorant behavior.

5) The pharmacist said he provided documentation. Again no one is refuting his claim. The widower says he can't find the document. So what, most people read them and pitch them, if they read them at all. What would be the purpose of hanging onto the thing once you have read it? We should not expect to find it among her effects. So, we have two qualified experts testifying that the issue was covered in a responsible manner. And, we have a widower who liked having sex with a sick woman, impregnated his wife knowing that BC is not 100%, and that pregnancy could kill her. His complaint is that he didn't know enough and someone else should pay him for that? (assuming that's what we are talking about.)

6) If the whole case is around what the widower didn't know ... then retardation should be prosecutable.

Finally... my condolences for your loss...
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News