Enlightened?
You need to read more than your love to pontificate.
Quote: On the way to the Microsoft campus in Hyderabad, you see people living in vinyl tents along the sidewalks. These people are the untouchables
Wrong.
How easily you term them 'untouchables' - It only reveals you gross ignorance of the subject matter you choose to write about.. Can you tell me one caste name in Bangalore who are 'untouchables'? and pray, what is the current relevent name for Untouchables? Answer: 'Scheduled Tribes and Scheduled Castes'
Majority of slum-dwellers are not 'untouchable' classes, but belong to 'Backward' or 'Most Backward' classes. There have been numerous studies that establish this.
Quote: If you're homeless in India, you are truly fucked. And about the only way to be homeless is to be born homeless, and thanks to the caste system you will stay that way until the day you meet your untimely demise
Nobody is exactly 'homeless' in India. They may live in squalid conditions, under a make-shift tent, but in Indian context, that is still a home, which has a number or address and the residents are accounted and possess voting rights that they exercise. The Slums are NOT static, but immigrants from villages moving to cities live in slums as a transitory residential phase (that can last years however) before they can move on.
India, as one of the most populous nation has a huge market and economical life. Majority of slum dwellers are 'self-employed' and are sure making their way up, slowly but surely. There is a huge transition underway in India and all economists have taken note of this huge shift.
Quote: Education is lifting Indians up, but not Indians in the lowest part of the caste.
Funny Caveat!
Govermental policies like reservations for lower castes in Institutions (Affirmation actions) have been in place since independence. A lower caste student has better chances of getting a place at elite institutions than a higher caste student. In states such as Tamil Nadu, 70% of the seats in Institutions are reserved for lower castes. Only the remaining 30% is open for general competition.
And yes, Remember that it was India's WEALTH that attracted everyone, from the Persians to the British, Dutch and the French.
India was not the same 100 years ago. It was a rich nation until it was plundered by every warring tribe that could invade it.
Quote: I have to disagree with you there. The majority of the worlds population live in India and China. In these countries, the poor aren't any better off than they were 100 years ago, while the rich are significantly better off.
Fact: 100 years ago, the British Raj were busy plundering India to build today's Britian.
100 years earlier than that, India was attracting every armed horde of barbarians, right from the Persians, Afghans and Mongols to the latter day Barbarians, the British, Dutch, Portugese and French to invade, drawn by the wealth of India.
Of course the British did not come to India to enjoy its climate!
According to local dailies here, the color of that rain in Kerala ranged from 'red' to 'burgundy' or 'brown'.
Initially, it was blamed on polluting industrial units, but then, hordes of scientists started to descend on the areas which received the rain.
Ok, getting to the point many of us are really subconsciously wanting to know...
Real life Peter Parker still a archetypical Geek in there, shy and hesistant? Or can he swanky walk up and in a sexy tone say, 'Hi there babe', swirls a mesimerised girl around and french-kiss her?
How about a good old 'two-in-ones'? A radio receiver with a ordinary tape recorder? Even equiptment as old as 15 years have the capability to record live radio!
How a mp3 recording facility along with a receiver is different beats me.
For decades people have connected their Satellite receivers or set-top boxes, etc to their VCRs and recorded TV shows.
I thought we were finished with the VRC, right to record problem long long back with a US Supreme Court ruling... and now this comes up.
Everytime good Engineers come up with better technology, the RIAA is going to sue people!!
What does RIAA want? freeze technology and science?
We watch a show. Then a policeman turns up at our place and forces us to swallow a pill or flashes a bright light (like in Men in Black) that makes us forget the whole TV show episode.
Then, the Music/Film industry can rerun that same episode next day and charge us for it again. This we, we can retire the artists and just keep rewatching the same show day after day just to give the Company PROFITS.
Good Idea right? [sees left and right, maybe the media execs will copy this idea.. got to patent it under the title: PERPETUAL profit by forcing Viewers to Forget the Shows and perventing them from possessing a copy in any FORMAT, digital or memorised
Your post is smack right on the point, which unfortunately nobody, repeat nobody, especially not the business executives at these large media organisations seem to understand.
Dude, spend a few mins and get a webpage or a blog up. We need some serious apologetics on behalf of customers. If capitalism is to be described in two words, it should be 'customers = kings'.
In the Entertainment industry, the commodity that is to be sold is the 'acts, creativity, talents and the show', not the MEDIA on which that is recorded.
The Industry is keen on selling the CDs and DVDs to gain profit. They seem to have forgotten that it is not the CDs or DvDs or TV shows thats important, but the content. The media is just irrelavent except that the customer needs ease of use, acessibility and total freedom over the 'CONTENT' in the media.
If it is becoming hard for the Industry to control the Content from being shared without returns on investment and profit to the industry, they should then revamp the whole industry's way of functioning instead of trying to struggle with the Media. The Media being electronic will always be easy to transmit over the networks, come what may. Heck, the networks exist for only one reason: TO SHARE, SHARE SHARE and SHARE. in short, to communicate. Don't fight against this nature of the networks.
Instead, try some creativity with the functioning, pricing and ultimately the industry itself. Or else, die. Something else will take up your place.
$100 windup-powered laptop targeted at children in developing nations.
The amount of prejudice on this thread is mind blowing...
Children in developing nations are *not* automatically STARVING! for Gods sake!
China, India and even Russia for that matter *are* developing nations.
Although there is considerable poverty in developing nations, it is NOT UNIVERSAL.
So please STOP saying that the children need to be FED and CLOTHED before they can even take a look at a computer!
This is as if those in the US and the first world are privy to some sort of Heavenly gadget that the developing nation children simple don't require.
On the other hand, there has been considerable study done in many countries that show that computers in school generally and comparitively motivate students into learning and exploring.
In a study in Nepal, a school was donated used WIPRO computers... a network was setup with a dialup connection to the net. This school saw students faring much much better then the neighbouring school with the same profile of students. Reasons were attributed to wider exposture, generation of interest in graphical programs on the computers, outlet for creativity and hardware tweaking.
The MIT notebooks are precisely made to satisfy the needs of such school going children. And yeah, these notebooks aren't going to be just thrown at every child in a playground, there is going to be a system with accountability and such.
Ah.. remember, these children who will get access to the notebooks are potentially the ones who will graduate in Computers and head over to the US to work in the IT or start off shore business in their own countries!
Atleast the notebooks are going to generate tremendous goodwill amongst the next gen. That is worth billions.
The point is that if Political Bloggers are subjected to any kind (even the slightest) of approval/licensing/legal procedures, that would dampen the spirits of free individuals to express their political views online.
If they make it mandatory to reveal or submit an affidavit about how one finances their personal but political view blogs, people will just shy away instead of proactively taking those steps.
Hmm..Just CURIOUS, but why is it then the majority of US editorials, writers and commentators take tooo much care to be 'politically correct'? Freedom must mean freedom from every kind of oppression right?
Maybe there is no political repression on free speech per se, but SOCIAL pressure is much higher..
One sentence like say, "ISLAM is NOT a religion of Peace, rather it is a Hatemongering, terrorist breeding religion bent upon bringing the whole world under its tyranny" won't perhaps bring the gestapo to the doors, but will sure bring more severe consequences from the politically correct crowd before you can even wait for the doors to be broken down..
That the French government would fund this.. they're one of the many countries that will prosecute you for holocaust denial or supporting nazis. Freedom of speech is for all.
Would that freedom include crying 'fire' in a crowded theater too?
Freedom of speech is a basic human right to express one's opinions, not a blanket license to incite terror, hatred and bigotry. That is NOT what the freedom is meant for.
How about freedom of press and free speech for bloggers right here in the US??
WASHINGTON--Political bloggers on Tuesday urged federal regulators to keep the Internet as free as possible from campaign finance laws.
At a public hearing convened by the Federal Election Commission, both liberal and conservative political commentators lauded the brand of freewheeling online politicking that has characterized recent elections. The FEC is under a court order to extend campaign finance rules to the Internet, and the Democratic commissioners voted not to appeal.
Online politicking should not be subject to onerous federal rules, Democratic FEC Commissioner Ellen Weintraub said. "We're all agreed about that." But, Weintraub added, "What is the best way for us to regulate bloggers?"
Radio and TV stations generally are immune from campaign finance laws unless their "facilities" are controlled by a political party or candidate.
One option, suggested by Republican Commissioner Michael Toner, would be to extend the same logic to say the "facilities" of Web servers should immunize political speech online.
launched on September 30 atop a Russian booster Launching on a Russian Rocket & Booster is so cheap that its one of the best kept secrets... Now that these students have found out that Launching isn't that hard compared to building a Satellite, Serious fun is about to begin...
Let the mass migration of Hackers to hacking and building Satellites begin!
"Only a board of specialists can determine whether a particular doctor's actions, judgements are correct, done in good faith and do not amount to gross negligence and incompetence"
You can't be serious.
Seriously, thats the way its is all over the world.
Health and IT are two very diverse fields and comparing them are like oranges and apples.
In *every* nation, doctor's actions are subjected to review ONLY by a panel of other doctors which then advise a court which in turn pass judgements. That advisory panel is mandatory to determine the nature and scope of the doctor's work.
You can't just try to 'imagine' microsoft and stuff like in this regard.
A doctor provides a service like any other professional and is entitled to the same amount of respect that I would give a lawyer, plumber, programmer or musician.
Just going to school for a long time and passing a test doesn't give anyone special insight or immunity from public critism
WHO is talking about RESPECT here?? This isn't about respect... you got it wrong.
Again, no body is against positive critisisms, but the issue is about how to go about recording those critisisms so that it is effective in its aim to improve services instead of downgrading into a flighfest fight of accusations and counter accusations etc..
My point was that there are certain procedures to be adopted since this is a delicate issue which *cannot* be compared with mundane daily software/harware issues..
They are one way documents. The doctor is the party which cannot disclose any information, under penalty of legal punishment and retaliation. This is for the safety, privacy and protection of the patient.
Yes, you're right.. I actually did not make it sound right in my first post.. but the point i was trying to make wasn't about NDA's at all.
Sorry but the patient has every right to talk about the doctor, and the doctor does not have the opposite right. Right again, but the The point is: If a patient has a complain.. maybe a valid one.. it might be true, so posting it online might NOT be a libel or slander.. but he/she should FIRST USE THE standard procedures like approaching the court if its serious, or approaching the administration of the hospital/city/municipality etc.. before going ahead to the net.
BECAUSE there is NO benefit to gain from the net.. It might be in good faith to warn others.. but how can one differential between the good faith posts and malafide ones?? and who is going to determine that?
Often, a patient can have a bad experience with a doctor, even though no sanctionable behavior occurred. The patient should still have the right to inform others of their experience -- this is, after all, what word-of-mouth is.
Quite right, Physicians still rely on word-of-mouth as advertising channels because they are discouraged from advertising their services as comodities or commercial offerings.... but you see, there is a delicate but important fineprint matter here regarding posting on the Internet..
On the Internet, you cannot control to whom your advice, remarks, opinions about a particular doctor reaches.. personally recommending or telling somebody to stay away from some xyz doctor is perfectly alright, but putting it on the web is totally a different matter altogether... That information on the web might affect someone's judgement and thus jeopadice NOT The doctor, but the patient himself from receiving potentially proper care... got my point? The issue is about control over the opinions.. even before we know that the opinions might be right or wrong.
>> Not true at all. A treatment agreement != a non-disclosure agreement. There is no NDA unless it is expressly agreed
Sorry for making it sould so simplistic.. anyway, there are many court precedents which rule that a NDA is implied on part of the doctor even without expressly agreed (although its necessary for successfull defense).. just because a patient did not or MORE IMPORTANTLY couldn't sign a NDA doesn't mean the doc can go ahead and disclose the patient's information...
>> Also, these NDAs may not cover truthful criticism of a doctor's practice. I, for one, would never sign an NDA requiring me to keep my mouth shut if I have a bad experience.
Ah.. you got me all wrong.. I am NOT against critisism... feedback is necessary to improve quality of service.. both good and bad feedback, but to COMPLAIN, one must follow procedures, not just post to a blog. Thats my point.
Actually, the courts have ruled in earlier instances and *even if* no documents were signed, there is an IMLIED CONTRACT.
>> So people can only protest bad medical care to medical professionals? [ Reply to This ]
Sorry, one has to protest to the courts and the courts set up SPECIALIST bodies just like a Jury, but only with those who have competence to understand the issues at hand to ADVICE the courts.. the Judgement is upto the Courts anyways!! The Specialist Doctors only advise the court, not deliver judgements. They make the issue understandable to the Judges.
>>> I really don't understand what non-disc agreement would ever be in place that would stop a patient from discussing his medical care with 3rd parties. The patient OWNS that information.
Yes, the patient OWNS that information...but does that necessarily mean that he is always free to discuss it or reveal it to third parties in a manner that will affect the doctor's ability or oppurtunity to treat other patients?
When the patient approaches a doctor,and when a doctor accepts the patient for treatment, they mutually enter into Two Implied Agreements .
1. That the Doctor will hold the patients' information confidential unless under legal santion or request by a court of law and that the doctor will exert his best efforts towards the relief, health of the patient, etc etc, etc... there are many liablities of the doctor towards the patient,
2. That the patient agrees to follow the Doctor's instructions, etc etc etc and at last agrees to approach a suitable court or body for arbitration in case of negligence or failure on part of the doctor to effectively discharge his duties..
Now, the question is: whether forums and blogs do make a valid and competent avenue to seek arbitration or whether its best to seek it under legal and professional bodies?
>>Doctors overseeing doctors? Why is that not the fox guarding the henhouse?
Nope, that analogy is wrong.
Only a board of specialists can determine whether a particular doctor's actions, judgements are correct, done in good faith and do not amount to gross negligence and incompetence.
How else would you want it to be? Judgement by a Jury with popular vote? Most of the time, decisions made by physicians/surgeons are complicated and depend on many factors.
When we have peer reviewed Journals in every scientific fied, why would you object to peer-judged and peer established standards?
Slashdot Mirror
Enlightened? You need to read more than your love to pontificate. Quote: On the way to the Microsoft campus in Hyderabad, you see people living in vinyl tents along the sidewalks. These people are the untouchables Wrong. How easily you term them 'untouchables' - It only reveals you gross ignorance of the subject matter you choose to write about.. Can you tell me one caste name in Bangalore who are 'untouchables'? and pray, what is the current relevent name for Untouchables? Answer: 'Scheduled Tribes and Scheduled Castes' Majority of slum-dwellers are not 'untouchable' classes, but belong to 'Backward' or 'Most Backward' classes. There have been numerous studies that establish this. Quote: If you're homeless in India, you are truly fucked. And about the only way to be homeless is to be born homeless, and thanks to the caste system you will stay that way until the day you meet your untimely demise Nobody is exactly 'homeless' in India. They may live in squalid conditions, under a make-shift tent, but in Indian context, that is still a home, which has a number or address and the residents are accounted and possess voting rights that they exercise. The Slums are NOT static, but immigrants from villages moving to cities live in slums as a transitory residential phase (that can last years however) before they can move on. India, as one of the most populous nation has a huge market and economical life. Majority of slum dwellers are 'self-employed' and are sure making their way up, slowly but surely. There is a huge transition underway in India and all economists have taken note of this huge shift. Quote: Education is lifting Indians up, but not Indians in the lowest part of the caste. Funny Caveat! Govermental policies like reservations for lower castes in Institutions (Affirmation actions) have been in place since independence. A lower caste student has better chances of getting a place at elite institutions than a higher caste student. In states such as Tamil Nadu, 70% of the seats in Institutions are reserved for lower castes. Only the remaining 30% is open for general competition. And yes, Remember that it was India's WEALTH that attracted everyone, from the Persians to the British, Dutch and the French. India was not the same 100 years ago. It was a rich nation until it was plundered by every warring tribe that could invade it.
Quote: I have to disagree with you there. The majority of the worlds population live in India and China. In these countries, the poor aren't any better off than they were 100 years ago, while the rich are significantly better off. Fact: 100 years ago, the British Raj were busy plundering India to build today's Britian. 100 years earlier than that, India was attracting every armed horde of barbarians, right from the Persians, Afghans and Mongols to the latter day Barbarians, the British, Dutch, Portugese and French to invade, drawn by the wealth of India. Of course the British did not come to India to enjoy its climate!
> Apathy and capitulation are the sustenances of tyranny. One of the rare breed of eloquent sentences seen on full blue moon days on /.
Does it make coffee too? /Atlast, affirmative
According to local dailies here, the color of that rain in Kerala ranged from 'red' to 'burgundy' or 'brown'. Initially, it was blamed on polluting industrial units, but then, hordes of scientists started to descend on the areas which received the rain.
>> Slashdot is, of course, not a blog Apart from the fact that some blogs are collective efforts, What about the Journal on /.?
400,000 computers and just 60,0000$? Or 60,000$ per month?
Bet some consipracy theories and books to come out now!
Ok, getting to the point many of us are really subconsciously wanting to know...
Real life Peter Parker still a archetypical Geek in there, shy and hesistant?
Or can he swanky walk up and in a sexy tone say, 'Hi there babe', swirls a mesimerised girl around and french-kiss her?
THIS is very Important ya know!
How about a good old 'two-in-ones'? A radio receiver with a ordinary tape recorder?
Even equiptment as old as 15 years have the capability to record live radio!
How a mp3 recording facility along with a receiver is different beats me.
For decades people have connected their Satellite receivers or set-top boxes, etc to their VCRs and recorded TV shows.
I thought we were finished with the VRC, right to record problem long long back with a US Supreme Court ruling... and now this comes up.
Everytime good Engineers come up with better technology, the RIAA is going to sue people!!
What does RIAA want? freeze technology and science?
errr.. wow. How about this solution.
We watch a show.
Then a policeman turns up at our place and forces us to swallow a pill or flashes a bright light (like in Men in Black) that makes us forget the whole TV show episode.
Then, the Music/Film industry can rerun that same episode next day and charge us for it again.
This we, we can retire the artists and just keep rewatching the same show day after day just to give the Company PROFITS.
Good Idea right? [sees left and right, maybe the media execs will copy this idea.. got to patent it under the title: PERPETUAL profit by forcing Viewers to Forget the Shows and perventing them from possessing a copy in any FORMAT, digital or memorised
DVD sales won't be affected.
Your post is smack right on the point, which unfortunately nobody, repeat nobody, especially not the business executives at these large media organisations seem to understand.
Dude, spend a few mins and get a webpage or a blog up. We need some serious apologetics on behalf of customers.
If capitalism is to be described in two words, it should be 'customers = kings'.
In the Entertainment industry, the commodity that is to be sold is the 'acts, creativity, talents and the show', not the MEDIA on which that is recorded.
The Industry is keen on selling the CDs and DVDs to gain profit. They seem to have forgotten that it is not the CDs or DvDs or TV shows thats important, but the content. The media is just irrelavent except that the customer needs ease of use, acessibility and total freedom over the 'CONTENT' in the media.
If it is becoming hard for the Industry to control the Content from being shared without returns on investment and profit to the industry, they should then revamp the whole industry's way of functioning instead of trying to struggle with the Media. The Media being electronic will always be easy to transmit over the networks, come what may. Heck, the networks exist for only one reason: TO SHARE, SHARE SHARE and SHARE. in short, to communicate. Don't fight against this nature of the networks.
Instead, try some creativity with the functioning, pricing and ultimately the industry itself. Or else, die. Something else will take up your place.
$100 windup-powered laptop targeted at children in developing nations.
The amount of prejudice on this thread is mind blowing...
Children in developing nations are *not* automatically STARVING! for Gods sake!
China, India and even Russia for that matter *are* developing nations.
Although there is considerable poverty in developing nations, it is NOT UNIVERSAL.
So please STOP saying that the children need to be FED and CLOTHED before they can even take a look at a computer!
This is as if those in the US and the first world are privy to some sort of Heavenly gadget that the developing nation children simple don't require.
On the other hand, there has been considerable study done in many countries that show that computers in school generally and comparitively motivate students into learning and exploring.
In a study in Nepal, a school was donated used WIPRO computers... a network was setup with a dialup connection to the net. This school saw students faring much much better then the neighbouring school with the same profile of students. Reasons were attributed to wider exposture, generation of interest in graphical programs on the computers, outlet for creativity and hardware tweaking.
The MIT notebooks are precisely made to satisfy the needs of such school going children. And yeah, these notebooks aren't going to be just thrown at every child in a playground, there is going to be a system with accountability and such.
Ah.. remember, these children who will get access to the notebooks are potentially the ones who will graduate in Computers and head over to the US to work in the IT or start off shore business in their own countries!
Atleast the notebooks are going to generate tremendous goodwill amongst the next gen. That is worth billions.
The point is that if Political Bloggers are subjected to any kind (even the slightest) of approval/licensing/legal procedures, that would dampen the spirits of free individuals to express their political views online.
If they make it mandatory to reveal or submit an affidavit about how one finances their personal but political view blogs, people will just shy away instead of proactively taking those steps.
Hmm..Just CURIOUS, but why is it then the majority of US editorials, writers and commentators take tooo much care to be 'politically correct'?
Freedom must mean freedom from every kind of oppression right?
Maybe there is no political repression on free speech per se, but SOCIAL pressure is much higher..
One sentence like say, "ISLAM is NOT a religion of Peace, rather it is a Hatemongering, terrorist breeding religion bent upon bringing the whole world under its tyranny" won't perhaps bring the gestapo to the doors, but will sure bring more severe consequences from the politically correct crowd before you can even wait for the doors to be broken down..
now, am waiting for MY doors to be broken down...
That the French government would fund this.. they're one of the many countries that will prosecute you for holocaust denial or supporting nazis. Freedom of speech is for all.
Would that freedom include crying 'fire' in a crowded theater too?
Freedom of speech is a basic human right to express one's opinions, not a blanket license to incite terror, hatred and bigotry. That is NOT what the freedom is meant for.
How about freedom of press and free speech for bloggers right here in the US??
o m+election+laws/2100-1028_3-5767156.html/
WASHINGTON--Political bloggers on Tuesday urged federal regulators to keep the Internet as free as possible from campaign finance laws.
At a public hearing convened by the Federal Election Commission, both liberal and conservative political commentators lauded the brand of freewheeling online politicking that has characterized recent elections. The FEC is under a court order to extend campaign finance rules to the Internet, and the Democratic commissioners voted not to appeal.
Online politicking should not be subject to onerous federal rules, Democratic FEC Commissioner Ellen Weintraub said. "We're all agreed about that." But, Weintraub added, "What is the best way for us to regulate bloggers?"
Radio and TV stations generally are immune from campaign finance laws unless their "facilities" are controlled by a political party or candidate.
One option, suggested by Republican Commissioner Michael Toner, would be to extend the same logic to say the "facilities" of Web servers should immunize political speech online.
http://news.com.com/Bloggers+plead+for+freedom+fr
Opera is now as free as it can get!
NO banners, no registration or license fees.. just Free!
Check their site out!
launched on September 30 atop a Russian booster
Launching on a Russian Rocket & Booster is so cheap that its one of the best kept secrets... Now that these students have found out that Launching isn't that hard compared to building a Satellite, Serious fun is about to begin...
Let the mass migration of Hackers to hacking and building Satellites begin!
"Only a board of specialists can determine whether a particular doctor's actions, judgements are correct, done in good faith and do not amount to gross negligence and incompetence"
You can't be serious.
Seriously, thats the way its is all over the world.
Health and IT are two very diverse fields and comparing them are like oranges and apples.
In *every* nation, doctor's actions are subjected to review ONLY by a panel of other doctors which then advise a court which in turn pass judgements. That advisory panel is mandatory to determine the nature and scope of the doctor's work.
You can't just try to 'imagine' microsoft and stuff like in this regard.
A doctor provides a service like any other professional and is entitled to the same amount of respect that I would give a lawyer, plumber, programmer or musician.
Just going to school for a long time and passing a test doesn't give anyone special insight or immunity from public critism
WHO is talking about RESPECT here?? This isn't about respect... you got it wrong.
Again, no body is against positive critisisms, but the issue is about how to go about recording those critisisms so that it is effective in its aim to improve services instead of downgrading into a flighfest fight of accusations and counter accusations etc..
My point was that there are certain procedures to be adopted since this is a delicate issue which *cannot* be compared with mundane daily software/harware issues..
They are one way documents. The doctor is the party which cannot disclose any information, under penalty of legal punishment and retaliation. This is for the safety, privacy and protection of the patient.
Yes, you're right.. I actually did not make it sound right in my first post.. but the point i was trying to make wasn't about NDA's at all.
Sorry but the patient has every right to talk about the doctor, and the doctor does not have the opposite right.
Right again, but the The point is: If a patient has a complain.. maybe a valid one.. it might be true, so posting it online might NOT be a libel or slander.. but he/she should FIRST USE THE standard procedures like approaching the court if its serious, or approaching the administration of the hospital/city/municipality etc.. before going ahead to the net.
BECAUSE there is NO benefit to gain from the net.. It might be in good faith to warn others.. but how can one differential between the good faith posts and malafide ones?? and who is going to determine that?
I hope I made myself clear now.
Often, a patient can have a bad experience with a doctor, even though no sanctionable behavior occurred. The patient should still have the right to inform others of their experience -- this is, after all, what word-of-mouth is.
Quite right, Physicians still rely on word-of-mouth as advertising channels because they are discouraged from advertising their services as comodities or commercial offerings....
but you see, there is a delicate but important fineprint matter here regarding posting on the Internet..
On the Internet, you cannot control to whom your advice, remarks, opinions about a particular doctor reaches.. personally recommending or telling somebody to stay away from some xyz doctor is perfectly alright, but putting it on the web is totally a different matter altogether... That information on the web might affect someone's judgement and thus jeopadice NOT The doctor, but the patient himself from receiving potentially proper care... got my point? The issue is about control over the opinions.. even before we know that the opinions might be right or wrong.
>> Not true at all. A treatment agreement != a non-disclosure agreement. There is no NDA unless it is expressly agreed
Sorry for making it sould so simplistic.. anyway, there are many court precedents which rule that a NDA is implied on part of the doctor even without expressly agreed (although its necessary for successfull defense).. just because a patient did not or MORE IMPORTANTLY couldn't sign a NDA doesn't mean the doc can go ahead and disclose the patient's information...
>> Also, these NDAs may not cover truthful criticism of a doctor's practice. I, for one, would never sign an NDA requiring me to keep my mouth shut if I have a bad experience.
Ah.. you got me all wrong.. I am NOT against critisism... feedback is necessary to improve quality of service.. both good and bad feedback, but to COMPLAIN, one must follow procedures, not just post to a blog. Thats my point.
Actually, the courts have ruled in earlier instances and *even if* no documents were signed, there is an IMLIED CONTRACT.
>> So people can only protest bad medical care to medical professionals?
[ Reply to This ]
Sorry, one has to protest to the courts and the courts set up SPECIALIST bodies just like a Jury, but only with those who have competence to understand the issues at hand to ADVICE the courts.. the Judgement is upto the Courts anyways!! The Specialist Doctors only advise the court, not deliver judgements. They make the issue understandable to the Judges.
>>> I really don't understand what non-disc agreement would ever be in place that would stop a patient from discussing his medical care with 3rd parties. The patient OWNS that information.
Yes, the patient OWNS that information...but does that necessarily mean that he is always free to discuss it or reveal it to third parties in a manner that will affect the doctor's ability or oppurtunity to treat other patients?
When the patient approaches a doctor,and when a doctor accepts the patient for treatment, they mutually enter into Two Implied Agreements .
1. That the Doctor will hold the patients' information confidential unless under legal santion or request by a court of law and that the doctor will exert his best efforts towards the relief, health of the patient, etc etc, etc... there are many liablities of the doctor towards the patient,
2. That the patient agrees to follow the Doctor's instructions, etc etc etc and at last agrees to approach a suitable court or body for arbitration in case of negligence or failure on part of the doctor to effectively discharge his duties..
Now, the question is: whether forums and blogs do make a valid and competent avenue to seek arbitration or whether its best to seek it under legal and professional bodies?
>>Doctors overseeing doctors? Why is that not the fox guarding the henhouse?
Nope, that analogy is wrong.
Only a board of specialists can determine whether a particular doctor's actions, judgements are correct, done in good faith and do not amount to gross negligence and incompetence.
How else would you want it to be? Judgement by a Jury with popular vote? Most of the time, decisions made by physicians/surgeons are complicated and depend on many factors.
When we have peer reviewed Journals in every scientific fied, why would you object to peer-judged and peer established standards?