Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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 -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lane3 who wrote (107026)	3/31/2005 10:37:21 PM
From: Brumar89	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793808

What happened that changed his mind between November 1992 and March 1993 when he wrote a Do Not Resuscitate order? Just a coincidence the malpractice suit was settled in January 1993? I think one has to really bend over backwards to maintain a benign view of Michael S. PS - there wasn't a plug to pull in 1992. Or in March 1993 when he wrote a DNR order. Or in August 1993 when he told a doctor not to give her an antibiotic for a urinary tract infection (which would have been life threatening if not treated - the antibiotics were given anyway). She may not have ever needed the feeding tube.

To: Lane3 who wrote (107026)	4/1/2005 7:05:50 AM
From: JDN	Respond to of 793808

I think its time to call a spade a spade. Michael has a no good morally rotten attorney. Anyone who disputes that only need review his book. Michael was in a malpractice suit. I can just imagin his attorney telling him, Michael if you wish to extract the MAXIMUM out of this insurance company Terri must be ALIVE and you must show a willingness to see to her rehabilitation. AFTER you get the money you can arrange for her death. And, thats exactly what he tried to do. Had it not been for her family, this would have happened many years ago and Mikey would have pocketed an additional 700k. These are the things he someday will have to answer to the Almighty for. jdn