Politics for Pros- moderated Message Board

STOCKTALK

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 : Politics for Pros- moderated

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Brumar89 who wrote (203374)	4/20/2007 8:32:22 AM
From: KLP	Read Replies (1) of 793830

O'Reilly brought up a good point to this question... He thinks two things regarding medical privacy especially with regard to VT... 1) IF a persons goes to the doctor on his own, then those records should be kept private. Doctor-patient privilege. 2) IF, as happened on the VT campus, the school ordered Cho to seek mental health care, and the Judge directed that to happen, then if he was found to be a danger to others, those others should have been notified...(i.e. the school, Cho's roommate, Cho's teachers, etc etc ) The Judicial direction is the difference. I do think the laws affecting the mentally ill that are a danger to others and themselves need to be looked at. The laws seem designed to protect the mentally ill's privacy and rights vis a vis the publics right to safety.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next