Slashdot Mirror
Anonymous Hacker Explains His Attack On Boston Children's Hospital (huffingtonpost.com)
Okian Warrior writes: Martin Gottesfeld of Anonymous was arrested in connection with the Spring 2014 attacks on a number of healthcare and treatment facilities in the Boston area. The attacks were in response/defense of a patient there named Justina Pelletier. Gottesfeld now explains why he did what he did, in a statement provided to The Huffington Post. Here's an excerpt from his statement: [Why I Knocked Boston Children's Hospital Off The Internet] The answer is simpler than you might think: The defense of an innocent, learning disabled, 15-year-old girl. In the criminal complaint, she's called 'Patient A,' but to me, she has a name, Justina Pelletier. Boston Children's Hospital disagreed with her diagnosis. They said her symptoms were psychological. They made misleading statement on an affidavit, went to court, and had Justina's parents stripped of custody. They stopped her painkillers, leaving her in agony. They stopped her heart medication, leaving her tachycardic. They said she was a danger to herself, and locked her in a psych ward. They said her family was part of the problem, so they limited, monitored, and censored her contact with them..."
everytime I know about someone being shot, I always hope being that crooked retard who stalks me and have a serious daddy issue, or one of her retard friends.
Do some research on the case. The hospital's opinion is at odds with a load of other independent medical experts with direct familiarity of the case. The state and the hospital overstepped their rightful authority in such an extreme example of overreach that it crosses well past the point of negligent misfeasance and frankly some people out to be in prison over it and the state and the hospital should be splitting the cost for real care for Justina for the rest of her life.
That said, I don't think that justifies attacking the hospital electronically or physically; just through legal channels. But the hospital and courts were complete and utter pieces of shit in this case.
-- "Government is the great fiction through which everybody endeavors to live at the expense of everybody else."
You're not a hero, dipshit, you just lashed out at some (alleged) assholes in one of the least productive ways possible.
I knew that BCH’s big donation day was coming up, and that most donors give online. I felt that to have sufficient influence to save Justina from grievous bodily harm and possible death, as well as dissuade BCH from continuing its well established pattern of such harmful “parentectomies,” I’d have to hit BCH where they appear to care the most, the pocket book and reputation. All other efforts to protect Justina weren’t succeeding and time was of the essence. Almost unbelievably, they kept their donation page on the same public network as the rest of their stuff. Rookie mistake. To take it down, I’d have to knock the whole hospital off the Internet.
I also knew from my career experience as a biotech professional that no patients should be harmed if Boston Children’s was knocked offline. There’s no such thing as an outage-proof network, so hospitals have to be able to function without the Internet. It’s required by federal law, and for accreditation. The only effects would be financial and on BCH’s reputation.",/i>
Politics; n. : A religion whereby man is god.
That said, I don't think that justifies attacking the hospital electronically or physically; just through legal channels. But the hospital and courts were complete and utter pieces of shit in this case.
So what's left then?
So which is it? Does she have mitochondrial_disease or does she have somatic symptom disorder?
And how did she end up at Boston Children's Hospital instead of at Tufts where they originally diagnosed mitochondrial disease?
And did the medical team at Tufts consult with the team at BCH at any point? Or did they just wash their hands of the situation?
what impresses me the most about that reatrd helena is how that little piece of shit made me hate star wars now.
For absolutely anything you'll find dissenting opinions
Do some research on the case. The hospital's opinion is at odds with a load of other independent medical experts with direct familiarity of the case. The state and the hospital overstepped their rightful authority in such an extreme example of overreach that it crosses well past the point of negligent misfeasance and frankly some people out to be in prison over it and the state and the hospital should be splitting the cost for real care for Justina for the rest of her life.
That said, I don't think that justifies attacking the hospital electronically or physically; just through legal channels. But the hospital and courts were complete and utter pieces of shit in this case.
Ironically, you state that the "complete and utter pieces of shit" in this case should have been only attacked through legal channels while somehow assuming that said party would somehow act fairly and responsibly while under oath in a courtroom, as we sit and question those who involved who took the Hippocratic oath to protect and preserve life.
Not quite sure you could present the catch-22 any better than that. No, I don't agree attacking them electronically to possibly put other innocent lives at risk was the answer, but chances are there's not a single courtroom in the land that would handle this case fairly, given the actions of the "pieces of shit" that led up to this.
TL; DR - The only thing more pathetic and unethical than the actions displayed by the medial system would be tasking our legal system to bring justice to this clusterfuck.
The parents have found a single doctor who said it might be mitochondrial problems, but after all this time it has still not been established. The parents refuse to get a proper muscle biopsy done, something that could clarify if that is the actual cause.
This is exactly what the system was designed for - whether it's mitochondrial or psychosomatic or something else, clearly this is a child who has medical needs that the parents are blocking. The parents are also involved in a similar lawsuit in Connecticut. The parents are definitely at some kind of fault for refusing to get the muscle biopsy done, and given that they are willing to have press conference after press conference, a diagnosis of Munchausen Syndrome By Proxy definitely seems within the realm of possibility (although it's certainly not proven).
everytime I know about someone being shot, I always hope being that crooked retard who stalks me and have a serious daddy issue, or one of her retard friends.
So .... you sure know how to pick 'em!
Seriously - if you ever want to really resolve this issue, take a hard look at yourself and your weaknesses, what was wrong with you deeply and personally that caused you to find such a wretched person attractive/trustworthy in the first place. You'll never get any real satisfaction by hoping some harm will come to him/her. Metaphorically, you could say that such a desire is their own wickedness making a home within you, like any other virus or infection.
That said, I don't think that justifies attacking the hospital electronically or physically; just through legal channels. But the hospital and courts were complete and utter pieces of shit in this case.
It's an interesting situation.
We've long bemoaned our inability to hold people accountable for their actions. Example after example of big, politically well-connected entities seem to get off scott free, and we the people are powerless to do anything about it, nor can we force the government to action.
(HSBC directors not being charged, Wells Fargo directors not being charged, Oracle paying $95 million in services restitution for wasting $240 million, and so on.)
Note that Justina's parents were issued a gag order that prevented them from talking about their problems, and it was only *after* her father broke the gag order that the situation received public attention.
Do we believe that the father should be prosecuted for breaking the gag order? He was justifiably concerned for his daughter's welfare. The hacker was also concerned, and wanted to send a message and perhaps prevent more abuse and tortures.
We all know very well that the democratic process is lost to us - as anyone who voted for Bernie Sanders found out.
How can we condemn the "last resort" actions of any individual trying to bring about just and proper changes?
Where do we draw the line?
Advice never given to female victims of the same.
You appeal from the courts to the court of public opinion. You kidnap the child from the hospital, and let the hospital re-open the court battle.
Learn to love Alaska
What's their motivation?
decided to kill my little sister because my parents were well-known socialists, I will now never side with the doctors against a child. The CONservative rulers of Seattle hate us and want us to die. That is why I still have dial-up at home. My parents have it a little better since they're allowed ISDN. Again, our rulers hate us which is why they created the Director's Rules.
definition
terrorist (n): a person who, in order to get you to do what he wants, hurts others
situation
Attacks fully or partially caused:
Inability to route prescriptions electronically to pharmacies
Email downtime for departments where email supports critical processes
Inability to access remotely hosted electronic health records
conclusion
Wherever we see this dynamic, regardless of sympathetic motives, we can recognize a bad guy. Heroes don't do it that way.
"We reject as false the choice between our safety and our ideals." --The American President (20.1.2009)
Advice never given to female victims of the same.
Actually I've just recently been the only real friend to a female whose man was a cheater who treated her like dirt and disregarded several of his responsibilities as a father. I told her similar - that I learned from *my* nasty experience that such a person should never have appealed to me, and the only reason she did is that I had weaknesses. I had no one to explain that to me, I had to work it out by suffering. My advice was understood and well received.
One thing she appreciated is that I treat her like a person, not as a woman. I don't need a woman - I've already got a wonderful one in my life. But being a friend to someone who obviously needs one (AND is mature enough to respect being told the truth without ego-cushions?!) is something else entirely.
So yes I've recently given the very same advice to a female, though once she understood a) that she made choices, and b) that she can also make different choices, I legitimately stopped calling her a "victim". I believed that had happened once I saw her make difficult choices in order to take her own independence back, all on her own. It's the same advice I'd have given to any fellow man, because the dynamics of power really don't discriminate.
Or did it merely allow you to feel superior to some dolts without actually changing anything?
Are you really that basement-bound that you think a hospital will get ready to do something stupid and suddenly pull up and say "hey - hold on here - we could screw this patient into death, but remember, MartyG might go all hacker on us. Maybe we should reconsider that evil thing now."
Hacker, please.
when the 'right way' wont work, do it any fucking way you can.
"I learned from watching you, dad!"
(so to speak)
rules are for little people. so, the hacker decided it should follow the rulebook of some other class of personhood.
I understand. I know that our system is filled with broken-ness. and when you lose faith that the system can work, you go rogue.
I fully understand. it sucks that we have gotton to this, but we have.
--
"It is now safe to switch off your computer."
You appeal from the courts to the court of public opinion.
Yes because everyone has the resources or wherewithal to make that happen.
Perhaps that's exactly what this fellow did, he utilized the skills he head to elevate the situation to greater awareness so that public opinion might bear.
You kidnap the child from the hospital, and let the hospital re-open the court battle.
I'm not sure if you forgot your sarcasm tag. Either way, kidnapping is usually a far less desirable action than hacking whatever the cause.
On the Oregon Cost born and raised, On the beach is where I spent most of my days
Your definition of heroes really isn't doing any favors to our LEOs or armed forces.
Know what word I really want defined? One for the groups/attempts to leverage the definition of terrorism, since anyone who should be listened to knows that's a fool's errand and likely to devolve in one of the 21st century's victim olympics.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Definitions_of_terrorism
Long article.
Nobody's saying what specific mitochondrial disease is suspected. Another article said that there was no diagnosis.
Additionally, after a year she didn't improve. I would think something that was all in her head wouldn't be causing her hair to fall out. I also read about the involvement of a Christian organization on the parents' side, which gave me pause.
All things considered, this seems like a case of a group of doctors at the hospital who have been on an irrational mission to prove themselves right. Not the first time or last time a doctor's gotten completely irrational to the detrimenet of the patient. A pediatrician says "mitochondrial disease" and refers to a gastroenterologist. Somehow instead of a gastroenterologist, the hospital has her seen by a psychiatrist who says "it's in her head." Who can you trust? The actual MD or the shrink?
I had read up on this case as well, and the hospital doctor and staff involved in her legal kidnapping need some jail time, as well as the CPS officials involved. If there are more cases like this we absolutely are going to have to amend some laws to ensure that when there is a disagreement of medical treatment among properly qualified doctors, which is what happened, the tie must always go to the parents wishes and CPS is barred from involvement.
CPS is already a monster in many states that will steal your children from you if you let them walk home from school or climb a tree and then treat you like you are a criminal without any due process while internally having the motivation, professionalism and efficacy of the DMV...
CPS was created with the best of intentions, but as the saying goes about the roadway to hell... The most shocking thing I learned in my research is the large number of children who have died in CPS custody usually when placed in "kid farm" foster homes where there are 6 or more kids in a single house and the sole source of income of the parents in the home is payments from the foster system.
Are we still trying to push that retarded cause to change the definition of a common word? It was a failure in 1986 and it's just embarrassing now. A hacker, to 99% of people, is someone who breaks computer security to get to places where they aren't wanted. Get over it.
Even the most rudimentary investigation into this story reveals that the hospital didn't decided to take her from her parents, the state child protective services (equivalent) did. There are also some pretty strong correlations between her condition being strongly exacerbated by the presence of her mother (which is the basis by which she has been diagnosed with a psychosomatic disorder.)
I don't doubt that this poor girls is suffering from physical disorder(s), but it's a very complex situation and the hacker seems like an idiot for reacting in this fashion.
Loading...
I think we found the hospital Dr.House works at.
Well, you have a pediatrician who says "mitochondrial disease" but no test is available to prove it. He also says "see this gastroenterologist," which the parents attempted to do.
What's unclear is why a psychiatrist stepped in and said "somatoform disorder" and "child abuse" and why the hospital prevented the patient from seeing the recommended gastroenterologist.
Inability to route prescriptions electronically to pharmacies
OMG! Don't tell me someone had to call it in!
Email downtime for departments where email supports critical processes
You're telling me this place actually bets peoples lives on EMAIL? Perhaps they should stay shut down!
Inability to access remotely hosted electronic health records
AND they have no procedure to deal with a network issue? No alternate networks? Not even via cellphone?
The workarounds are there. They mean bringing in extra people and cost money, but they are there.
Shut the fuck up and hang yourself already.
The medical experts that sided with the family included the girls primary physician at Tufts Medical Center who knew her well and was treating her successfully, as well as many other MD experts in the same field who were unpaid and who reviewed and agreed with his diagnosis.
They were MDs, not homeopaths.
The state sided initially with the hospital and thus they are as criminally liable for her injury, deprivation of her meds for mitochondrial disease, 16 months of physical and psychological torture, as well as treating the parents like they had abused their daughter. She went in with the flu, but was otherwise functional, with videos just prior of her skating and hanging out with friends.
The quacks at the hospital locked her in a psych ward for 16 months. After 16 months without meds the hospital had nearly killed her, which is why they finally returned custody to the parents, because if she had died someone would have been facing manslaughter at least if not 2nd degree murder. When she was finally released she could not stand, sit or walk on her own and had other severe symptoms of the untreated mitochondrial disease. She has also had to have multiple surgeries to correct some of the damage.
Since your google is broken, here are some links. I know it sounds like Stalinist Russia, but this actually happened in the US a couple of years ago...
https://www.bostonglobe.com/me...
http://www.theblaze.com/storie...
If you have kids and didn't know about this story, you need to wake up and pay attention to the people and politicians who are trying to take away your rights as a citizen and as a parent. It is some scary shit.
If you disagree, please post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like
That was specifically banned though. They weren't allowed to speak about it.
Kidnapping is what the hospital did. Taking her from the hospital is rescuing a kidnap victim.
Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
My Google is Fine and I did look.
And slog though the Family written pieces.
Did the Doctor from Tuffs write anything? Appear at the trial? Will be at what I assume is a Malpractice trail?
But really why should I look?
If you care you can post good links.
Why should I research every injustice on the web.
The Poster should have put more info in Article.
Otherwise it just reads here is how a Hacker rationalizes.
Just another round in the medicine - nutrition wars where the corporations and State take control of you and your family's lives, and flush them down the tube.
He denied access to important medical information to hundreds of sick children and their parents. These are the actions of a childish sociopath. Punishing the many for the benefit of one is not righteous. It was a self-deluded perception of reciprocity. You cannot claim to be on a crusade when your methods not only harm your target but innocent bystanders, this is called collateral damage. Having sick children, many of them living in extreme pain, as part of your collateral damage is absolutely unacceptable even to underground hackers. There is a moral line that most won't cross but this asshole did and for that I say throw the book at him. Don't let him touch a computer for 20 years.
The hospital colluded with the state.
Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
i'm afraid i'll have to disagree with you there, sir.
I can't believe there are people like you who would wage their ideological warefare over the subject of a child being the subject of inhumane abuse. You are fucking disguising.
tell that to the on duty cop evey hospital has
Good to see the right to due process and a speedy trial has been erased due to Ter'rism and 'Murica.
You think child protective services would have done anything without a tipoff from the hospital? Government workers have better things to do. Like sipping on their coffee.
The parents refuse to get a proper muscle biopsy done, something that could clarify if that is the actual cause.
This is exactly what the system was designed for - whether it's mitochondrial or psychosomatic or something else, clearly this is a child who has medical needs that the parents are blocking.
But did the hospital perform the proper muscle biopsy while she was in their custody? If not, then no, the system quite clearly failed.
definition
terrorist (n): a person who, in order to get you to do what he wants, hurts others
That's not the definition of terrorist. That's a form of blackmail.
I particularly enjoy the irony in this how a hospital can accuse parents of medical abuse, kidnap their child, and then proceed to...ACTUALLY medically abuse the child. This does not compute. Also, the hospital is looking forward to "vigorously defending itself" from the suit. Paraphrased that's the hospital saying "bring it on, we got bigger lawyers".
Personally I wouldn't mind if any of those quacks were the victims of some other medical abuse; the kind you get from the business end of a blunt instrument in an unlit alleyway. They all deserve to be stripped of their licenses and careers, and possibly stripped of their OWN families for being horrendously shitty excuses for human beings and causing actual measurable harm to a child. Drag them out into the courtyard and flog vigorously.
And this is why we have clueless morons joining Anonymous, so that they can screw up a whole hospital without leaving their mother's basement. Sure he *thought* he was making a different, but he did not make any difference and he put other people in danger. Which is more fun than actually protesting, contributing funds for a lawsuit, writing an angry letter, and so forth. Sure, those actions might not cause any change, but neither did this action. No injustices were righted, no problems fixed, no angels earned their wings.
If he did care at all, he would have not done this anonymously and he would have announced what he did or claimed responsibility afterwords. Instead he waited until after he was arrested. He did it for the lulz, no other reason.
Anonymous exists to give their members an exuse to lash out. Just like Guy Fawkes their hero, they try to cause disruption but are inept at doing so and end up in history as a laughing stock.
It's pretty simple when you boil it down to its basic facts.
This isn't a complicated situation and we don't need Matlock to figure out what the fuck happened here. It's pretty plain and simple, actually.
-- "Government is the great fiction through which everybody endeavors to live at the expense of everybody else."
You appeal from the courts to the court of public opinion.
Yes because everyone has the resources or wherewithal to make that happen.
Anyone can write a blog or post a Youtube video, and then send the link to some friends. After that, if the meme fails to spread, then you likely didn't explain your point very well, or you didn't have much of a point to make.
That was specifically banned though. They weren't allowed to speak about it.
Then how did Martin learn about it?
Somebody apparently doesn't understand hospitals, disaster recovery and continuity, or... well, much of anything. While there are ways of working around and dealing with these things, you've still got to deal with the disruption of making those switches, and a lack of performance and efficiency, all of which are directly impacting people's lives and safety. Note phrases there like "email *SUPPORTS* critical processes" - that doesn't mean that those processes solely rely on it and can be done no other ways, but that it is an established and efficient tool that's used. Having to switch to an alternative or backup process is disruptive, and won't be as familiar. And in this case, that can literally end up killing people. Honestly, if you're making excuses for why it should be okay to electronically attack a hospital, you can go straight to hell.
Can anyone provide any evidence that this girl actually has a mitochondrial disorder? I take care of a lot of very complex mito kiddos, and the really sick ones are attached to drips 24 hours a day.
Something here does not ring true. The only information we have is from the parents and patient, because no one else is talking, due to the law suits. I refuse to draw any conclusions until we know the whole story.
The only thing worse than a Democrat is a Republican.
Welcome to the nanny state that so many are literally begging for. The State can make error after error, committing the most heinous acts, yet when called upon it, it's brushed off as "an innocent mistake", the perpetrators are sorry, and we assure you, it won't happen again.
Yet when a pleb makes errors like this, it's court and prison time. Ignorance or well-meaning intentions are irrelevant, and we'll make an example of you for disobeying the State.
The hospital can not have an opinion because it is a building, not a person. There are real individuals hiding behind it, doing the dirty deeds.
Expose the individuals and their actions. Only that way you can make a difference.
Beats strapping a bomb to your chest to get attention
Who thinks he knows more than specialist medics. Seem to be self-evident example of wiki/Munchausen_syndrome_by_proxy
Hackers are nerds and nerds are antisocial. They hate everybody because Real People shun and isolate them, and rightly so. Therefore they lash out at society like the little shits they are. When you meet a nerd, beat it up until he bleeds piss and publicly humiliate it. Shove it into a dumpster. Brown-swirlie it. It deserves that and more.
The definition of "terrorist" has been utterly destroyed by the political and media interests since 2001.
It has no meaning now.
All I do is replace the word with "crime" (and "criminal" as appropriate) when consuming news reports.
Most large combined houses like that are hot-spots for sexual abuse, often from the other children. In a large family the taboo and social pressures against incest suppress such activities. But in foster homes that beneficial affect is significantly removed.
when it was happening.
Go look through the archives. They had it up when she was first made a ward of the state and the debate over whether her parents were abusing her was first happening, and again when she was returned.
That said, this sort of medical malpractice is not as uncommon as we would like to believe. The scary part is how often it is covered up, rather than the egotists involved being publicly shamed if not removed from their jobs. The former in many cases would do far more than the latter, especially if combined with scrutiny/oversight of their future actions.
Being a doctor/medical professional is a privilege, not a right. While a minority, some doctors and staff need to be reminded of that regularly or much like other forms of bureacrats they tend to become self-sustaining and begin doing more hard than good.
So what you're saying is that they weren't actually unable to call in prescriptions, communicate between departments, or access patient records. It did cost them about $300K.
Note that he attacked the internet facing portions of their network. It's not like he was knocking out medical monitors or anything.
Or the mainstream is lazy and unthinking; anything requiring thought or effort will not gather the majority's attention or sympathy.
So instead of something useful, you commit an act of petty vandalism.
If I was thrust into defence of a child like this I would move the proverbial heaven and earth to sort out the situation via the courts and independent experts, and sue for costs later.
But this guy acts like a kid that had his Xbox taken away for not doing his homework? Hope nobody ever really needs his help in any tangible form.
tldr it's okay to change the meaning of a word if enough idiots agree with it. See: literally.
Superb prose, I hope it makes it to your collected works, it really deserves to. I particularly love the apparently random capitalization, definitely suggestive of a divergent psyche.
I do not want your cheap brainburning drugs. They are useless for work. And I am a working man today.
I agree with you both
I do not want your cheap brainburning drugs. They are useless for work. And I am a working man today.
Why talk to the collateral damage?
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
"just through legal channels."
That can take a while, during which at best a person remains in distress, maybe worse.
Well if the family member thought hacking into the hospital was a good way to deal with the problem. Perhaps there is a problem with that family and they are dangerious to the child.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
Reminder to self :
Boycott boston !!!
Martin Gottesfeld may have done some nasty things, but for putting this out in the open, deserves a medal!
I hope they sue the state of boston into fucking bankrupcy! buncha fucking bastards!
This is to be expected given current cultural trends.
100 years ago -- The family was the social safety net, elderly parents were the patriarchs/matriarchs of the family, many families lived in one giant house that they built themselves and maintained over generations.
Now - The government is the social safety net and in the parent in absente, actual parents are overruled in any conflict with the state, kids run away from their parents as soon as they turn 18, parents are put in nursing homes or hospice care to make them quickly die when they get too old or expensive, everyone lives in pre-made tract housing that is assembled with the lowest cost 'builder grade' components.
But, yay for progress.
Private hospitals. Now part of the 'nanny state'.
When people desperately believe there is one true villain responsible for all of life's ills like libertarians do - a believe that has never been true anywhere about anything because nothing has ever been that simple - they will see that villain everywhere, even where he is conspicuously NOT the guilty party.
Or is the "nanny state" you refer to the courts ? Who made the mistake of listening to medical professionals ? You seriously would prefer we get rid of the court system ?
Sure, let's go back to settling disputes with brawls. That worked so much better...
Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
Is there a source for these facts or did Moses bring them down from on high? I'm not stating that they're wrong, for all I know they're bang on. But how do you know? Matters.
I do not want your cheap brainburning drugs. They are useless for work. And I am a working man today.
Literally still means literally. What the fuck d'you think it means? Now "disinterested" - there's a word that has been broken, and the language is poorer for losing it.
I do not want your cheap brainburning drugs. They are useless for work. And I am a working man today.
>, I don't agree attacking them electronically to possibly put other innocent lives at risk was the answer
Had that been the case - it would not get much sympathy, but it wasn't. The hospital does not need internet to keep patients alive, in fact under federal law a hospital cannot even get accredited unless all their patient care facilities are fully capable of functioning without internet. Knocking out their internet would not put anybody at risk whatsoever and the hacker knew this.
All it DID do was knock down their donation page and cost them a bunch of money - which made a point.
Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
Yes because everyone has the resources or wherewithal to make that happen.
What, there are people out there who don't have a phone? You can get a cheap mobile plan prepaid for under $20 a month, on a sub-$100 smartphone. Based on the circumstances described, the parents were capable of calls or emails to the local news stations.
kidnapping is usually a far less desirable action than hacking whatever the cause.
You can't kidnap your own child. If there was sarcasm, it was in the use of "kidnapping" to refer to a rescue, but you obviously can't even consider it.
Learn to love Alaska
So leaving their child medically abused was better than breaking a bad court order? Sometimes you have to break the rules to do the right thing. The parents should have done that before the hacker did his thing.
Learn to love Alaska
I had the same thought. If they are that deeply interested in the well being of people, why don't they hack and block the gun manufacturers 24x7?
definition terrorist (n): a person who, in order to get you to do what he wants, hurts others
Umm, a terrorist is someone who uses terror to get what they want. Clue is in the name.
Wanna buy a shirt?
https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u
Crime is not enough to be a 'terrorist'. Terrorists use terror, or "fear", as a primary weapon. They may not have the military might to win a war, but after blowing up some planes, people don't dare to fly for a while. (Or gassing a subway to keep people above ground, or bombing a few malls, . . . )
Destroying a hospitals internet is not something that cause fear, so not a terrorist. Making people angry and inconvenienced is not enough. He may very well be a criminal though.
DuckDuckGo/Google/Startpage etc is your friend. The references on Boston Children's Hospital's Wikipedia page are a good place to start.
I left a few links last night, but the modern /. has become infested with the alt-right, who are immune to facts and reason.
"The Truth is Out There." Really, it is. Probably. The hospital has done little to try to present any facts that support their theory that it's all in the girl's head. But the alt-right loves the "it's in her head" diagnosis. The alt-right doesn't care if the "it's in her head" diagnosis and lack of treatment kills her. They'll just find a witch to blame for hexing her. I'm waiting for the alt-right to declare the "ball Earth" theory to be political correctness ran amok because the Earth is obviously flat and anything else is delusional thinking.
You can't kidnap your own child. If there was sarcasm, it was in the use of "kidnapping" to refer to a rescue, but you obviously can't even consider it.
If we're talking legally, then you can kidnap your own child if you've had custody taken away from you. If we're talking ethically it's a bit more debatable in this case.
Only crack the nuts that crack. You don't put the ones that don't crack in the sack.
The parents refuse to get a proper muscle biopsy done, something that could clarify if that is the actual cause.
The hospital could easily have done that biopsy after parental rights were revoked and the child was made, effectively, a ward of the hospital. Except that the hospital's diagnosis "somatic symptom disorder" requires no diagnostic tests, or at best, a handful of 'negative' results. Once the psychiatrist said, "It's all in her head," and wrapped his own ego around that claim, things got ugly. The doctor "in charge" has no interest in overturning his own diagnosis. Child Protective Services doesn't have the resources to evaluate medical information, and appear to have a policy of not questioning anything volunteered by a physician. The hospital/CPS even ignored the recommendation of their own ethics committee, that the child be evaluated by physicians from outside the hospital.
Medically, there's the family physician treating the child for a mitochondrial disorder for which there are no conclusive tests, and there's the hospital physician treating the child for psychosomatic symptoms because there are no conclusive tests. There's two sides to every story, but one of these docs referred the child to other experts for evaluation; one of these docs refused to let other docs examine the child.
Agree 100%. The Hospital stuck their nose into the family's affair, and the girl wasn't even a Massachussetts citizen, the family resides in Connecticut. Worse yet, she was able to walk when she was taken, afterwards, deprived of her meds, she was not. The child abuse and kidnapping should have the decision makers who did this in prison.
You only ever hear one side of almost any medical story, because patients (normally for good reasons) have a right to almost total confidentiality. Doctors can say practically nothing about individual cases without the express, written consent of the patient. Obviously this is not going to be given if there is a complaint against the doctor or hospital in question. The patients are at liberty to say anything at all about the case and nobody is able to correct them if they lie or misunderstand things. I've been a medical student and doctor since 1994 and can honestly say I have never seen anyone in the health care sector deliberately harm a patient or encroach on their autonomy without good reason, but obviously hospitals are staffed by fallible human beings and mistakes are made. Most patients are surprisingly understanding about mistakes if you are open and honest with them about what has happened and apologize.
Here's a well researched explanation of what is known about the case.
The hospital can't give their side of the story because of the lawsuit and HIPAA, but it will come out when the case goes to court. What is clear is that the parents are whackos.
There were efforts by the MA DCF early into this case to place Justina in a program located approximately twenty minutes from her home in Connecticut. The program was identified as an appropriate placement to meet Justina's needs and would have been able to provide services for the parents. Unfortunately, the Connecticut program declined to accept Justina because Mr. Pelletier told the program he would sue the program if Justina was placed there.
The family went broke fighting this. You can donate here if you want to help: http://justiceforjustina.com/
Good for him. These people should be stripped of their medical licenses and locked in psych wards.
But why should I take the word of someone who thought it was a good idea to hack a children's hospital?
when the 'right way' wont work, do it any fucking way you can.
The ends do not justify the means.
Egos, on all sides, are what got this issue to the point it is. Ego on the part of the hospital psychiatrist refusing to consider medical causes once the 'psychosomatic' diagnosis was in. Ego on the part of child services refusing to use truly independent medical consultants. Ego on the part of the family refusing to consider any psychiatric/metal health connection. This blind commitment by each of these parties that their own way is the only right way, and their willingness to achieve that outcome, without compromise, by whatever means necessary, is exactly why the problem persists.
I also read about the involvement of a Christian organization on the parents' side, which gave me pause.
Well then you're dumb.
The family are devout Catholics. The Catholic teaching on refusing necessary medical care is that it is tantamount to suicide, a sin that gets you sent to Hell.
While the girl was in the hospital, the hospital authorities were preventing her from going to Mass with the hospital's chaplain.
The family reached out to Christian groups because they didn't have enough money to sue to get their daughter back. And because it is in fact BS, the (perhaps right-wing) Christian groups agreed to help. And then, years later, because it was BS, the (perhaps left-wing) Huffington Post reports sympathetically on the hacker.
Private hospitals. Now part of the 'nanny state'.
When people desperately believe there is one true villain responsible for all of life's ills like libertarians do - a believe that has never been true anywhere about anything because nothing has ever been that simple - they will see that villain everywhere, even where he is conspicuously NOT the guilty party.
Or is the "nanny state" you refer to the courts ? Who made the mistake of listening to medical professionals ? You seriously would prefer we get rid of the court system ?
Sure, let's go back to settling disputes with brawls. That worked so much better...
I'd rather have pistols at 20 paces, myself....
You're messin' with my Zen Thing, man.....
You can't kidnap your own child. If there was sarcasm, it was in the use of "kidnapping" to refer to a rescue, but you obviously can't even consider it.
Uhhhh....In many states you can, especially in contested custody cases. See folks thrown in jail all the time taking their own children from grandparents (who have been granted legal custody), or ex-spouses without their permission....
You're messin' with my Zen Thing, man.....
Duels with swords are way more manly.
Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
HERP A DERP!
You idiot. They did break the gag order.
Maybe you should spend some time reading up on this case. You don't always need to suck authoritarian dick you know.
But can a private hospital legally take custody away from a parent? If anything, the hospital is negligent by not further exploring options.
GP here. That's why it gave me pause. My own parents became white supremacists and converted to Christian Identity. I go out of my way to avoid businesses that advertise themselves as Christian. It's been a while since I read my Bible, but I had thought that long-haired hippy fellow who was the main character for the first 4 books of the New Testament said not to shout your faith from a street corner. Anyway I digress.
In this case, the Christian group is apparently one group of many that advocates for patients with rare diagnoses like mitochondrial disorders. So I might not have been clear, but it seems to be the psychiatrist at BCH who is invoking demons. The Christian group is backing up the parents, the Tuft's pediatrician, and the mitochondrial disorder diagnosis.
I'm certainly aware that Christian Identity and white supremacism doesn't describe the majority of Christians just as jihadism doesn't describe the majority of Muslims. But where there is religion involved, there is always the risk of quackery. Emotions run high. One diagnosis ("demons") can be supported by the Bible and also have back up from a medical professional (psychiatrist) whereas another diagnosis ("mitochondrial disorder") can be supported by another medical professional.
I think given the girl's response to both treatment plans, it's fairly obvious that mitochondrial disorder is at least more correct than somatoform disorder. I should make sure I'm absolutely clear. Either the pediatrician or the psychiatrist is essentially going "I can't find the problem so it must be demons." One article mentioned there was no test for the mitochondrial disorder suspected by the pediatrician. At the same time, the psychiatrist seems to be on even thinner ice by essentially blaming the patient for her symptoms and her lack of recovery.
Do some research on the case
I have. And this is what I concluded: this is a case of zebras vs. horses. That fully explains the motives of the actors in this case.
Medical students are famously taught that when it comes to diagnosis, "When you hear hoofbeats, think horses, not zebras." In other words avoid making a diagnosis of a rare condition when a commonplace one will do.
There are obvious epistemological problems with this rule of thumb; one is that zebras do, in fact, exist, and in certain parts of the world are more common than horses. The second is that what is a "zebra" is dependent upon your clinical practice. For a clinical geneticist specializing in mitochondrial diseases Munchhausen-by-proxy is a zebra. For a doctor who specializes in detecting child abuse, a severe mitochondrial DNA mutation is a zebra.
Now consider a court that regularly deals with child abuse cases. Which specialist is the judge (who has his own epistemological biases) going to believe? The specialist in obscure genetic diseases, or the one who's been nailing abusers for years?
Dr. Newton, the Children's Hospital lead in this case, is admired by children's advocates in Massachusetts, and is described by some of them in one news story as "a highly respected physician who fearlessly speaks the truth as she sees it." And maybe that's the problem. Maybe playing the heroic role for too long is bad for your judgment, makes you see disagreement as unwillingness to listen.
What I am suggesting is that the error on the part of Children's Hospital here may have come out of the same mindset under which Anonymous operates, one suffused with the warm, affirming glow of self-righteousness. As I've grown older I have learned to recognize that feeling for what it is: a corrupting influence on judgment.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
That said, I don't think that justifies attacking the hospital electronically or physically; just through legal channels. But the hospital and courts were complete and utter pieces of shit in this case.
So the courts were utter pieces of shit, but you still think there is some "legal channel" available to attack them through? There really wasn't, which is why this guy is a hero for bringing attention to the malfeasance. Legal channels had already failed the child and her family, and left her at the mercy of these psychopathic bureaucrats.
"Somebody has to do something. It's just incredibly pathetic it has to be us."
--- Jerry Garcia
Private hospitals. Now part of the 'nanny state'.
Boston Children's Hospital may be "private" by your definition, but it's an entirely tax-exempt organization that receives millions of dollars in Federal funding every year. It's more like a public/private partnership.
So, yea, part of the 'nanny state'.
"Somebody has to do something. It's just incredibly pathetic it has to be us."
--- Jerry Garcia
tell that to the on duty cop evey hospital has
In case anyone actually thinks this is true, it's not. Cops are not automatically stationed at hospitals (some, maybe), though most should have at least on-site contracted security.
But can a private hospital legally take custody away from a parent? If anything, the hospital is negligent by not further exploring options.
Well, they did it. All it took was a overzealous state bureaucracy and a compliant court system.
"Somebody has to do something. It's just incredibly pathetic it has to be us."
--- Jerry Garcia
No, but the state (a judge) can reassign custody to the hospital based on evidence the hospital provides, which I think is what happened here.
Anyone can write a blog or post a Youtube video, and then send the link to some friends. After that, if the meme fails to spread, then you likely didn't explain your point very well, or you didn't have much of a point to make.
Not everyone has mastered the art of making a persuasive argument, even if they are on the morally-correct side of the debate. He used the tools he had at his disposal. (Note that this is not meant as support of the appropriateness of the methods used).
In the past people would just have gone postal on their asses.
Knocking out their internet would not put anybody at risk whatsoever and the hacker knew this.
In this case it might not have, but in other places it could. For example, many hospitals don't hire Radiologists, but instead contract out to private groups. They will very often read the images remotely part or full-time, and if the hospital's Internet access is down, the images cannot be read. Emergency situations can often require radiological services.
The parents have found a single doctor who said it might be mitochondrial problems, but after all this time it has still not been established. The parents refuse to get a proper muscle biopsy done, something that could clarify if that is the actual cause.
The hospital had full custody of her and provided any treatment they saw fit for 16 months. Why didn't they do a "proper muscle biopsy"? Oh, right, because one of their "experts" diagnosed it as psychological, so there was no need to check for anything else. Even while her health was getting worse and worse the whole time.
Aside from that, a muscle biopsy (typically multiple are required, and they are painful) will not necessarily produce a definitive answer.
Not sure why you want to vilify the parents and accuse them of lying after it is so clear the Children's Hospital is at fault, here. Wait... are you posting from Boston?
"Somebody has to do something. It's just incredibly pathetic it has to be us."
--- Jerry Garcia
Churches are tax exempt as well. That does not make them public. All non profts are tax exempt. And there is not a single private corporation in the USA who does not get a lot of federal and state funding. If thats the definition you choose then the USA has no private sector and has been a particularly inefficient variety of full blown communism for at least 2 centuries.
Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
That would be illegal without some sort of non internet dependent backup.
Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
Yes, they can call a radiologist to come on-site or transfer them to another hospital, but both of those delay patient care.
Private hospitals. Now part of the 'nanny state'.
...
Who the hell backed up this "private" hospital when they took a child from her parents?
The very nanny-state you pooh-pooh.
But "It Takes a Village", right? The "Village" (state) is allowed to take children away from parents because one group of doctors disagrees with another?
THAT IS WHAT YOU ARE DEFENDING, you fucking fool.
This case occurred about 2 years ago. Their medical experts were not "alternative". In fact, their main physician was the department head of metabolic medicine at Tufts University. So far far from it.
Like "fibromyalgia", which many doctors felt was a non-existent disease. (Which has now been disproven as the cause of many fibro cases has been identified.) The doctor at Boston Children's Hospital did not believe "mitochondria" disease to be real. So he determined that it was all psycho-somatic, that her illness was just in her head. When Justina was brought to the hospital, the mother insisted that she needed a feeding tube. The doctors objected to this, used it in court to argue that the mother was pushing false illness and unnecessary treatments upon her daughter. Oh, they failed to mention that the very next day they had to give Justina a feeding tube.
This became a big toodoo... and the truth is, the state of Mass and Boston Children's Hospital uber fucked up. The issue was, that once they did, they committed fiercely to remaining in their position instead of admitting fault for fear of lawsuits. They essentially moved Justina to a psychological ward, ceased medical treatment, and her health condition plunged.
Also of note, this is NOT the first incident like this on the part of Boston Children's Hospital. They did a similar thing to another parent. The difference was she used to work for Child Protective Services. So they did not substantiate the charges. That parent in fact loss a child because of BCH's actions. A second child developed the same genetic mitochondria disease. And has since done significantly better after have been removed from BCH care and received treatment from the same far more knowledgeable expert at Tufts that was treating Justina.
In other words, BCH is hurting and even killing children by their actions. The sum of it being that egotistical doctors harming children because of their egos.
It was justified. This bullshit should not be allowed. When they refused to discuss with the Tufts doctors about the child's treatment they failed to care for the child.
And there is not a single private corporation in the USA who does not get a lot of federal and state funding.
WUT?? LOL!
"Somebody has to do something. It's just incredibly pathetic it has to be us."
--- Jerry Garcia
And that's a damn good thing, since the constantly changing oath is not what you think it is.
The phrase "first, do no harm" does not occur in the oath for example.
In the original oath, and many variants, the primary promise was to keep the knowledge of healing restricted from all but a certain group, and the secondary promise was to do nothing that might harm the reputation of that group, such as surgery or chemical abortion, even if that would mean the patient's death. Instead such cases should be referred to specialists - that is, barbers or witches, who already had a bad rep for killing patients with surgery and abortion.
It's true, look it up. Some of the later versions are more admirable. But there is no canonical Hippocratic Oath, and most (not all) versions contain serious moral/ethical compromises.
Well... If you're poor. But in 1916, if you were poor you didn't live in one giant house your clan built and maintained. You were dying of the flu in a trench in France. And this is not too long after the peak of the robber-barons, so if you weren't getting shot in the war, you were paying out the nose for a shanty next to skid row getting paid in company script. Or shoveling horse manure in the streets of New York. Or for kids, trying to sell newspapers and a poor street urchin. A slight step up from losing limbs in the textile factory. And remember that if you're a woman, you can't vote for another 4 years. And enough wives are getting beaten by their drunk husbands that it's a social issue and it makes prohibition look like a good idea.
But hey! If you were moderately wealthy 100 years ago, sure, life was better in some ways than being poor today.
Mmm... House is usually right. Unless someone has taken his pills away again.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
we don't need Matlock to figure out what the fuck happened here. It's pretty plain and simple, actually.
Still, I wouldn't exclude him from the case if he were so inclined. You probably agree, I just think it needs to go on record.
I can log on to the clinic I use and check test results and other medical records for me, my wife and my child.
hurr durr alt-right alt-right alt-right alt-right alt-right hurr durr durrpa alt-right alt-right alt-right I luvva da Hilldog why is the alt-right so means to her!
That's what you sound like.
God damn can anyone here even manage to form a single coherent sentence without resorting to some kind of partisan blame game? For fuck's sake I'm voting for Trump and I can tell you from following this story that the hospital and state was obviously at fault for this whole thing from day one. In fact, if you knew anything about the "right", you'd know that they don't take kindly to leftist state social workers taking kids away from their families. What in the everloving fuck are you talking about with this alt-right witch hex horseshit? Good God, you just make yourself sound like such a fool.
They wanted to take their child to a different doctor and the courts stepped in and stripped the rights of the parents so yes it is the courts fault saying they know better than you for raising or caring for your own child. That is almost the definition of NANNY STATE.
I had all but forgotten about this mess, it's things like this that get swept away and forgotten as things get worse and worse.
I don't agree with the hacking but the government needs to do its actual job and realize they fucked up, hold those asshole doctors and judges responsible, punish them and let's come together to actually help the children like their mission is.
I'm really sick of this cover our own ass society we live in. Fess up and move on, be an adult about it, take your punishment, you fucked up.
If you didn't see this on the news then blame the news. They called everyone they could think of. I did see them in the news I look at. Maybe stop blaming the parents and start blaming your MSM for not giving a shit about this story and not airing it enough.
Egos, and it is quite common. More common than you would believe. And this is from nurses and doctors I know.
It is not a single doctor. It is the head of the metabolic department at Tufts University Medical Center. Oh, guess what....this isn't the first incident of this situation at Boston Children's Hospital. The last incident, led to the death of a child. Who's sibling also has the same problem but has done extremely well under the Tuft medical teams care.
BCH refused to do so with another child. When after months of fighting and attempting to seize custody. They finally relented. Conducted the biopsy, which revealed....strong possibilities of mitochondrial disease.
So this isn't even BCH's first foray in killing kids because of egos.
You are lying.
Justina Pelletier had been born prematurely and had a history of gastrointestinal issues and learning difficulties, and she has had several surgeries throughout her life to correct these problems. Despite this care, she did not get better.
Even before BCH, the Tufts doctors suggested that her problems may have a mental health component, but her parents did not accept it then, either. At this point the doctors where looking for any type of plausible diagnoses they could find. Dr. Mark Korson's (Tufts) diagnosis of mitochondrial disorder consisted of cataloging Justina's symptoms, rather than performing a diagnostic lab test (muscle biopsy) and he admits he could not be certain his diagnoses was accurate. She was taken to Boston her past gastroenterologist had transferred there and she was having difficulty walking and wasn't eating. At BCH, Dr. Jurriaan Peters, the neurologist on call in the emergency department had his doubts about the mitochondrial disorder diagnosis. He noted that a muscle biopsy had never been done and that her metabolic workup did not show anything unusual. He called in psychologist Dr. Simona Bujoreanu, who observed that Justina's symptoms grew worse when her mother was around. This led Dr. Bujoreanu to suspect somatoform disorder. Somatic illnesses manifest as physical symptoms without any physical cause, being psychological in origin. Justina's parents rejected the psychological diagnosis and insisted that Justina continue being treated for mito disorder.
The resulting conflict between the Pelletiers and the BCH doctors resulted in a suspicion that Justina was the victim of medical child abuse, a term that has come to replace Munchausen Syndrome by Proxy. Basically, BCH believed that Justina was being inappropriately treated for an illness she did not have, and that the treatment was thus putting her at unjustified risk. The case was reported to the Massachusetts Department of Children and Families (DCF), who agreed with the BCH doctors and had Justina admitted to the hospital's pediatric psychiatric unit.
A lengthy and contentious battle pitting Justina's family against the hospital and DCF. Most media outlets and social media sided with the parents, using lots of emotion. The hospital had to remain silent about any details of Justina's care due to patient privacy laws. All that was really available was the narrative told by Justina's parents.
Justina returned home in 2014 by the same judge that had originally ruled that she should remain in DCF custody, when he noted that her parents were cooperating with her care. A few months after returning home, she was admitted to Yale-New Haven Children's Hospital for GI problems. Despite tests and treatment, she did not improve and was transferred to Children's Hospital of Philadelphia. As with media coverage during the lengthy custody battle, there are a lot of implications that her health issues are the result of Boston Children's treatment of Justina, though there is no clear evidence that this is the case, nor do her gastrointestinal health issues predating BCH receive much mention.
There are a couple of things that I feel must be pointed out, since they are details that bear on this whole story and have not been widely reported. First off, although Justina was treated at Boston Children's Hospital for a very (very) long period, that decision was made by the Massachusetts Department of Children and Families, not by the hospital. DCF ordered her to remain at BCH to be treated in the psychiatric unit. Furthermore, there were early efforts by MA DCF to move Justina from BCH back to Connecticut, but they were unable to do so in part because of Lou Pelletier's threats to sue a program just twenty minutes from their house if Justina was placed there:
It the recipe for liberty.
Right, it's not like the guy in question was trying to kill anyone.
Which you can argue the BCH doctors were doing.
Of course a hospital doesn't have the authority to do so, that's why they call CPS.
Because they had a small window before the judge ordered a gag order about it. If you didn't hear about it blame the judge who said they couldn't talk to the media anymore. Because nothing says freedom of speech like a gag order.
That was way later.....towards the end of the 6 months
WAY WAY WAY LATER...
That was when BCH and Mass CPS were trying to save their asses, and transfer the problem to Connecticut to deal with. But still didn't want to relinquish custody.
As to the mitochondrial disease, it is a new area that is hard to assess. Similar to fibromyalgia.
Justina wasn't the first BCH did this too. Actions toward a prior one cost a mother the life of her child. This isn't to avenge, so much as to raises awareness and inhibit future transgressions against children and their families.
What this was, was a psychologist who interfered in medical treatment of a present diagnosis. Ceased medical case, while patient's condition rapidly deteriorated. And who's objection to parent for giving advice, in fact, said hospital had to within 24 hours do exactly what the parent had stated was necessary based on numerous prior medical experiences.
No, had this been my child. There would of been a lot of dead doctors....
Is allowing the egos of doctors to kill children.
You all are wrong
The frustrating thing is that the system has all the legal means tied up, with a near monopoly on medical opinion and a 'doctor's judgement' notion to hide behind. Even if you are successful by legal means, there may not be much of the person you are fighting for left, long before you reach a conclusion.
John_Chalisque
Scary. Hard to wrap my brain around.
I'm not an anarchist, but sometimes I strongly feel a state of nature would be better than this kind of enforced abuse.
at 20 paces they're harder to fight, too.
Yeah, fuck those doctors.
"There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there always has been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.""
Considering that historically Microsoft has behaved in a perfectly psychopathic and anti-competitive manner (especially regarding the spying revelations of Win10) it seems more like "Microsoft's jihad against Linux and everyone else, especially the end user."
Christian extremists don't believe in psychology, they believe in demons.
What's the difference?
I also read about the involvement of a Christian organization on the parents' side, which gave me pause.
Genetic fallacy. Your opinion has been discarded.
What are you blathering about? The point is that the middle class has been eroded by nanny-state leftists who think they know best. This is a case of a whole motley cast of nanny-statists thinking they know best when every single one of them was wrong (as nanny-state leftists usually are almost 100% of the time). There is actually no question where the answer is nanny-state leftism or banning anything.
[citation needed]
Actually, it means I can live my life however I want to, regardless of whether your "knowledge" says I'd be better off doing what you say. The opposite is totalitarianism, and you are a fucking totalitarian.
I'd rather have pistols at 20 paces, myself....
I'd rather you have pistols at 20 paces as well. Let the nuts shoot each other.
You can't kidnap your own child.
If by "own child" you mean the child for which you have sole legal custody, then yes you are right. If you meant the child you provided either the sperm or egg to create, then you are most certainly wrong. Most kidnappings are perpetrated by parents without (sole) legal custody.
Did the parents still have sole legal custody?
So leaving their child medically abused was better than breaking a bad court order?
So you take your child. Now what? Go on the run? Live out of your car for the rest of your life? Get caught, then permanently lose custody along with felony kidnapping on your record? Seems like a good plan.
Where did I say I liked Hilldog? You're the one making this partisan. I've voted for Republicans, Libertarians, and occasionally Greens and I think a Democract somewhere in there before. Did I trigger the poor baby?
The alt-right is something apart from all of those in case you hadn't noticed. You're the one who sounds like a fool, which supports what I said about the alt-right being immune to facts. They're immune to nuance as well. They have no other way to view the world other than in black and white terms.
They don't do that because it would do nothing to improve the well being of people.
Get caught, then permanently lose custody along with felony kidnapping on your record?
I know plenty of felons with custody. that you know nothing means you should keep your mouth shut, not play Trump and assert that you know the truth because you are an "outsider" with no knowledge of the situation.
Learn to love Alaska
You missed a step.
Fact 8: Idiot tries to make things better by attacking an entire hospital, taking all of it's patients, which primarily consist of children not being misdiagnosed and treated for the wrong ailments, in as collateral damage.
It's like hearing that someone received bad customer service, and deciding to bomb the entire store to "teach the store a lesson" while blatantly ignoring the fact that you'll be harming people who had nothing to do with the situation.
I hope this anonymous source is outed, doxxed, drawn and quartered. Even the dumbest errors, and errors that are clearly malpractice, do not enable a third party to harm innocents in the pursuit of justice. This person wanted revenge, not justice, and was willing to harm other patients so his pet-cause/patient got justice.
Morally this is reprehensible. It justifies firing machine guns at crowds in malls to "get the one bad guy hiding within the crowd".
Calm down tough guy. I *suspect* that if you had already lost custody, as in this case, that kidnapping the child wouldn't help you get custody back. That's all I said.
Source: common ******* sense.
you are an "outsider" with no knowledge of the situation
And, who are you now?
And, who are you now?
Someone with more experience with the family court system than you.
Also, since you seem quite slow: A legal guardian taking their child back isn't kidnapping. https://www.theguardian.com/wo... Even in a foreign country, usually harsh on foreigners, a mother trying to kidnap her child was not charged. Rarely would such a charge be laid.
But if you want to argue that Lebanon is more rational than the USA, and the reasonable result of "arrested for kidnapping", being "released and told not to do it again" would never happen in the insane USA, then go for it. Similar examples are harder to find in the US, because the parents wouldn't have been arrested in the first place, but if you are so certain find an example. Go on, I dare you. Show me a single example in the US of two parents, taking their child from anyone and being charged with "kidnapping". It's legally impossible. But you know more about everything than everyone else combined. We should just call you Mr. Trump.
Learn to love Alaska
Someone with more experience with the family court system than you.
Do you see anything at all wrong with assuming you know more than every stranger you run across on the internet? Maybe, just maybe it's what makes you so abrasive.
Also, since you seem quite slow: A legal guardian taking their child back isn't kidnapping.
Easy big fella, I never said that. You are are hyped up from your own reading between the lines. The only thing I said was 1) taking a child for which you do not have custody is kidnapping (duh much?) and 2) having a felony kidnapping charge will complicate your life, including future efforts to gain custody of the minor you previously kidnapped.
Go on, I dare you.
Nah. I see your comments on almost every article. You're a troll. You are boring me now, bye.
Easy big fella, I never said that.
having a felony kidnapping charge will complicate your life,
You didn't "say" it, you assumed it. That it would result in a kidnapping conviction. Fine, you never said it. Then you went off on an non-sequitur. Then attack me for pointing out you silly non sequiturs and absurd assumptions.
Learn to love Alaska
Tax breaks are federal funding too.
Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
That wonderful expression in Justina's face when she told the reporters, "They were crazy." Priceless. As Professor Zimbardo's research demonstrates, in such tightly knit authority structures, yelling at a naked person in the shower saying, "You cannot be rude!" is acceptable. What they wanted from her was absolute submission and luckily she was rescued in time. I love happy endings.
I hope this doesn't come across as an insult but:
...a THREE digit ID?
1. What do you do for a living?
2. How old are you?
I'm genuinely curious about the background of people who are as... let's say "non-cynical" as you seem to be. I genuinely wish I had the life you've had, such that a story like this seems ridiculously implausible.
If you haven't lived to see one or two spectacular fuckups--I mean of the really tragic sort, not just "the server just went up in flames"--then it's very hard to describe. Let me try anyway:
Upper-middle class people working in a bureaucratic setting is a recipe for a very special sort of refined, extra-powerful fuckups. Yes, the threat of being sued can sometimes cause people to wake up and act sensibly but it just as frequently causes them to double down. If you admit a mistake, you WILL get sued. If you keep ploughing on and the months pass and details get blurry and there's a lot of people involved, people are less likely to focus on you. Plus, the more time these people give themselves the more chances they have of finding evidence that their theories were correct.
This isn't something that happens fully consciously. Most humans lie to themselves all the time (in one way or another) but these are mild to moderately rich, reasonably intelligent, overworked humans who are in public contact positions (and much of those people are very emotional) and red tape all day long.
They are not paragons of introspection, and most of them probably learned a long time ago that the key to success doesn't have anything to do with repeatedly second-guessing their own diagnoses.
I have an undiagnosed stomach condition. After getting an endoscopy (paid for out of pocket, because I didn't have insurance out of the time), the specialist noticed "very mild" inflammation but nothing else. In his report, he gave a diagnosis of anxiety. He said that I was "probably" habitually swallowing air some kind of nervous tic (continuous unexplained belching is one of the key symptoms I was and to an extent still am having, along with occasional bouts of burning pain) and I should go see a psych for antianxiety medicines.
I was flummoxed. I did not walk into his office with an anxiety diagnosis. We didn't discuss mental health at all. And I was pretty fucking sure I wasn't swallowing air out of some kind of goddamn random nervous tic; however, he wouldn't talk to me any more or say anything else after that. And why should he? He knew I was uninsured and thus couldn't afford to pay for a bunch of random tests, and he knew the inflammation was mild enough to hand-wave away as irrelevant, but he can't very well say "nothing is wrong with you".
Doctors are overqualified, overstressed and overworked. Of course, none of us here on slashdot know what actually happened and we should keep an open mind and all of that...
But speaking only as a humble student of human behavior, someone has seen his fair share of Dilbert-esque catastrophes, I'd have to say that institutional incompetence is almost certainly more common than Munchausen Syndrome by Proxy.
Tax breaks are federal funding too.
NO. No, it's not.
"Somebody has to do something. It's just incredibly pathetic it has to be us."
--- Jerry Garcia
Oh it absolutely is, and so is every other form of corporate welfare.
If you owe me money, and I forgive part of the debt - no accountant on earth would fail to write that up as income you received from me. A tax break is funding. Plain, clear and simple - it's reducing a legitimate debt which is a form of income.
Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
A tax break is not debt forgiveness. A tax break is a reduction in the tax you owe.
You get a tax break (I'm assuming you work for a living, which is probably a bad assumption considering your attitude that the government owns everyone and everything) all over the place, from AFDC, EIBT, Standard deductions, healthcare deductions, electric car credit, energy efficiency credit, etc. etc. Not to mention if you don't work, you can get housing credit, EBT food, etc. (except you don't if you're living in your parents basement while planning the Communist Revolution. So YOU are actually a public employee working for the Federal government.
"Somebody has to do something. It's just incredibly pathetic it has to be us."
--- Jerry Garcia
>A tax break is not debt forgiveness. A tax break is a reduction in the tax you owe.
These two sentences both mean exactly the same thing. See a tax is a debt.
I also never said normal citizens don't get tax breaks - it's entirely irrelevant to what I did say. My point was that every corporation gets money from the government. Some in the form of tax breaks, some in the form of all sorts of subsidies, and special tax breaks for certain kinds of businesses etc. etc. there are a billion ways that government puts money in the pocket of corporations. That and that alone was my point.
What government does for citizens was *not* part of my point.
If it was I would have mentioned this. When Detroit's municipality was essentially bankrupt - they stopped paying pensions to retired municipal workers because they claimed they didn't have money to do so. Pensions, by the way, are funds those people had paid in during their careers- it was their own money they were being denied. The pension bill was around 28-million.
At the exact same time - a series of tax breaks and other corporate welfare bills were passed in Detroit giving a combined 60-million dollars to various corporations - the bulk of which went to two Koch-brothers owned businesses. This was income lost by the city which the businesses saved - which is mathematically indistinguishable (and is not different from) just plain giving the companies money.
Please note how the corporate welfare Detroit was paying (under, you guessed it, republican pressure) was more than double what they would have needed to make the pension payments to the retired workers. Yet somehow they could afford the latter but not the former ?
The problem with America isn't the welfare system - it's that the welfare system spends nearly all it's money on the already rich and almost none of it on caring for the poor, even stealing money from the poor to give to the rich. Which is the only way to describe failing to pay pensions (their money) but managing to give tax breaks to corporations instead.
Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
I would not go with HUFF Post. Anyone cares to get this to the frontpage of internet instead?
http://www.freemartyg.com/reports.html
Or otherwise verify the references.
You don't know much about tax exempt organizations, do you? When the IRS loses your tax return, they won't tell you until years later, at which point they will give you a bill for $25/day since it was originally due. They find ways to tax organizations either through incompetence or targeted attacks.
You also missed the point of the post you responded to. Being tax exempt is half of the equation. Receiving boatloads of money from the government was the other. How many churches do you know of that are funded by the federal government?
Well. he's NOT a lawyer, a judge, an md or a member of city council. He's a tech guy. So he used the tools he had to fight back with. End of story. Although.. maybe , instead, he should have gone directly after the offending MD and, you know, cancelled his credit card, membership at the golf club, had a repossess on hiis BMW .. ;-)
So, he's going endanger other children over Justina? And this is ok? And the ends justify the means? And everyone here is ok with that?
Had it been my daughter, I could not say Ransomeware would have been my only course of action...
Please learn to write basic English.
It's not complicated at all, and the people seeking to protect the incompetent and MALICIOUS medical professionals involved int his case are as much of the problem as the actors directly involved.
You've got corrupt people in positions of authority who care about money, period.
The US medical establishment IS that. The public is too busy worshiping doctors to be bothered to prosecute the worst of them.
And that organization is now doing everything in it's power to shield the people who harmed that family.
I'm sorry, but they should be destroyed for this. The fact that it was permitted to happen and nobody's been held accountable yet should cause people some serious pause.
Medical people and doctors do not deserve to be worshiped, this is exactly what happens when you do that.
Why the rail against libertarians? This was a significant example of overreach by the state. The Hospital participated, but it was the state that kept the child from their parents for over a year.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
(2013 section)
This was entirely a case of overreach by the state, they ignored diagnosis that were based on actual medical evidence and supported the hospital when they tried to claim that the parents made up the whole thing.
APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
Yes, some of the incident is documented on Wikipedia:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
(the 2013 section)
APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
Both children were born before the condition manifested and was identified.