Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Given the fact that she has nine children that she cannot afford to feed or clothe, it's a safe assumption that she doesn't read carefully or follow directions correctly.
What in the world does one have to do with the other?
We are only hearing one side of this woman's story - hers. Given the fact that she has nine children that she cannot afford to feed or clothe, it's a safe assumption that she doesn't read carefully or follow directions correctly. She may very well have signed a consent without realizing what she was signing.
If the defendants can prove that she signed a consent for a tubal ligation they'll be able to get the case dismissed pretty quickly, and rightly so. In that case I will agree that she was wrong to bring the case and make the claims she has made.
By the same token, will you agree that the doctor was in the wrong if it is shown that she was subjected to a tubal ligation without her consent?
If the defendants can prove that she signed a consent for a tubal ligation they'll be able to get the case dismissed pretty quickly, and rightly so. In that case I will agree that she was wrong to bring the case and make the claims she has made.
By the same token, will you agree that the doctor was in the wrong if it is shown that she was subjected to a tubal ligation without her consent?
Yes, it would be wrong....but it's happened before(doesn't make it right).
She said, """said she’s been unfairly judged. She says she had eight of her nine children while in committed relationships."""
I love the "comitted relationshipS" plural....ya, they sound so "committed", what, all nine of 'em?????
No, the doctors goofed up but she needed a wake up call....and hopefully got one.
You know, that's pretty funny. In this case conservatives dont mind someone's personal freedom being...curtailed.
I agree that she has the freedom to have as many children as she wants. I do not see such freedom extending to obligating taxpayers to support those children. In your opinion, at what point does personal responsibility enter into the equation?
I want to exercise my personal freedom to stay at home with no viable financial means to do so, continue at my present standard of living, and have a new Corvette appear in my driveway each year. And I want you to support me, financially and morally in my decision. Are you up for it? If so, get out your checkbook!
With freedom comes responsibility. I see none of the latter in her case. She claims 8 of her 9 kids were conceived while in committed relationships. (How about #9? Just a quickie behind the bowling alley or what? But I digress...) Where are the baby daddys now to support all these results, er, love children?
I agree that she has the freedom to have as many children as she wants. I do not see such freedom extending to obligating taxpayers to support those children. In your opinion, at what point does personal responsibility enter into the equation?
I want to exercise my personal freedom to stay at home with no viable financial means to do so, continue at my present standard of living, and have a new Corvette appear in my driveway each year. And I want you to support me, financially and morally in my decision. Are you up for it? If so, get out your checkbook!
With freedom comes responsibility. I see none of the latter in her case. She claims 8 of her 9 kids were conceived while in committed relationships. (How about #9? Just a quickie behind the bowling alley or what? But I digress...) Where are the baby daddys now to support all these results, er, love children?
Right... you're all for personal freedom, just not some people's. Would you rather she have had abortions? Be honest now.
Obviously medical malpractice is a horror and if someone was sterilized against there will that would also be horrifying.
But that doesn't mean I can't be glad that the cow can no longer pump out children she cannot support and that when the youngest is schoolage she will finally be forced to get a job and start refilling the taxpayer coffers that she has been sucking off of for all of these years. She isn't disapointed she can't have more children - shes mad that she will eventually have to get off public assistance and make her own way. And anyway - how does a welfare queen have a facebook account? How did she afford her own computer and internet provider? I can't see her dragging six or seven kids to the library with her.
Right... you're all for personal freedom, just not some people's. Would you rather she have had abortions?
My point is that she can have all the freedoms he wants as long as she backs it up with personal responsibility for her actions - which she seems incapable of doing.
And yes, I'd rather she have had a score of abortions, not one of which would ever be on my conscience. The sterilization came much, much too late. Honest enough for ya?
Right... you're all for personal freedom, just not some people's. Would you rather she have had abortions? Be honest now.
Personal freedom without personal responsibility? Why are the two no longer linked? I know your question wasn't directed at me --- but I would have preferred this woman took care of her children and herself. Had she had to do so I bet she would have married one of her boyfriends, be getting child support from them and most likely would have stopped at three children.
I think if she didn't consent to the procedure than that is a valid legal offense... Doctors cannot sterilize someone without consent, however its not "totally" irreversible considering it could be reattached or you can even have in-vitro fertilization... I think at this point her defense of wanting more kids is inexcusable... she says she doesn't want her kids to suffer but by having more kids with minimal finances is "suffering"... so when she says that, that's full of bull...
Her "defense" is not about wanting more kids. The issue is that apparently she was sterilized without her consent. THAT'S a problem.
If those doctors and/or that hospital do not have a signed, written consent from her for such a procedure, it certainly seems like this woman has a very, very good medical malpractice case. She may just possibly end up wealthier than any of you posting on this board.
You see, this may be a good example of what happens when people let their "emotions" run away with them, if the doctors did the procedure intentionally, knowing there was no consent, or it's a very good example of medical malpractice. I can't help but wonder if this same sort of malpractice would have happened to someone with financial resources and health insurance......hmmmmmm
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
