07 Jun 09
Originally posted by ScriabinMore cut & paste insults.
I reserve this "abuse" for you -- the Abuser General here at RHP
you are the only one allowed to dish out abuse, one guesses
you are the only one allowed to approve thread subject matter?
you are the only one who cannot cope with a reasonably interesting discussion that I find helpful
if you don't, go away and install that glass window in your o ...[text shortened]... ewn in here?
a sick sick mind, that's what
that's you, FMF, a very sick man indeed
Interesting. Compelling.
07 Jun 09
Originally posted by FMFIt was a serious question. What kind of "emotional intelligence" are you exhibiting if talking about yourself ad nauseam on a public forum is your way of coping? And when someone objects to it, or tries to prick your embarrassing balloon, your abuse is so unbelievably raw and preposterously personal. I never ever dish out abuse as wretchedly snarling and as off target as you do. What is one to make of this? What do you make yourself when you read back over a Thread like this - complete with all your little rebukes and condescensions for people who respond to you? Do you like it? I am dead serious. You have issues about suicide, I understand that. But if Threads like this are part of your healing process, then your own "emotional intelligence" is surely open to question.
Maybe starting Threads about yourself on a chess site's public forums is part of your coping process?
Originally posted by Scriabin
ain't your business. go away
07 Jun 09
Originally posted by FMFwhat was the source?
More cut & paste insults.
Interesting. Compelling.
that's good -- a knee jerk rejoinder cut and paste from your own previous nonsense
no, I didn't cut and past that post
nor this one, you pathetic, puerile, putrescent, p3cker headed, piece of putrid pond scum.
wouldn't be surprised if you left the gate open on purpose
07 Jun 09
1 edit
Originally posted by FMFI do not care further to respond to you
It was a serious question. What kind of "emotional intelligence" are you exhibiting if talking about yourself ad nauseam on a public forum is your way of coping? And when someone objects to it, or tries to prick your embarrassing balloon, your abuse is so unbelievably raw and preposterously personal. I never ever dish out abuse as wretchedly snarling and as off ...[text shortened]... of your healing process, then your own "emotional intelligence" is surely open to question.
you have forfeited any interest on my part to engage in anything with you in future
I shall not address you or speak to you again
I hope you will provide me the courtesy of reciprocating.
let this be the the last or at least the penultimate msg either addresses to the other.
good bye
07 Jun 09
Originally posted by ScriabinI agree. I looked back to read my post.Much speculation on my part and jumping to conclusions.(maybe had one two many) 🙂
you are jumping to conclusions absent facts. you should not assume facts not in evidence.
for example, you have no knowledge of what he told his doctor on the Friday.
You also have no way to discern how the psychologist knew he had a gun.
thus, your advice suffers from what a lot of top of the head, not carefully considered comment does -- you are ...[text shortened]... 'd come to similar conclusions.
But your take here goes beyond the facts you've been given.
07 Jun 09
Originally posted by utherpendragontry again -- you have a good mind and an honorable background
I agree. I looked back to read my post.Much speculation on my part and jumping to conclusions.(maybe had one two many) 🙂
for example, you might reflect on all the servicemen who have been committing suicide in recent years -- that might bring up some thoughts on the general subject regarding the effect that has on their friends and family.
I don't mean to criticize what you wrote, just to redirect the thought process --
let's try this as something more about suicide and suicide survivors in general
I merely thought this subject and my own story would make a compelling and interesting discussion with more relevance than acting like a bunch of cable news channel talking heads spewing their role-play over politics.
While having the ability to keep two contradictory propositions in my head at the same time -- for as a lawyer you have to do that, I find it very disturbing to have two or more conflicting emotions or feelings about something this complex and serious at the same time.
what about you?
07 Jun 09
1 edit
Originally posted by ScriabinWell that may be a good thing.
I do not care further to respond to you
you have forfeited any interest on my part to engage in anything with you in future
I shall not address you or speak to you again
good bye
You are obviously fragile. It was a serious question. The "emotional intelligence" you are exhibiting by talking about yourself ad nauseam on a public forum is probably a poor way of coping. I think you needed that pointed out to you.
nor this one, you pathetic, puerile, putrescent, p3cker headed, piece of putrid pond scum
It's funny to think I have "forfeited" my right to be subjected to this kind of 'first string' Washington D.C.style personal abuse. Remember, I wasn't abusive in this kind of way at all. In fact I never am. I simply contributed the thought that your suffocating self-obsession might be a factor in the dilemma you find yourself in. Who knows if my penny's worth will help. Hope so.
07 Jun 09
Originally posted by ScriabinIt just strikes me that anyone with any reasonable chance of winning such a suit would have to be a family member. And if the fellow was in such distress to commit suicide, where were they when he did? Were they helping him as much as the doctor they are accusing of negligence? It just strikes me as an attempt to deflect blame to avoid having to look at their own role in the matter.
why do you wonder that?
07 Jun 09
Originally posted by ScriabinIts not a matter of caring or not caring.
what of capacity to "want" such a thing?
you do not care enough for anyone else to try to prevent such a thing?
how interesting
I wouldn't like to have a member of my family killing him/herself, but I don't think I should be held responsible for something that person had decided to do that didn't harm anyone else but him/her.
07 Jun 09
Originally posted by generalissimono, you shouldn't.
Its not a matter of caring or not caring.
I wouldn't like to have a member of my family killing him/herself, but I don't think I should be held responsible for something that person had decided to do that didn't harm anyone else but him/her.
however, in a case of medical malpractice, the claim would not be based on the idea the defendant doctor was responsible for the death.
the claim would be that given the doctor's knowledge of the patient's intent, given the existence of an agreement between them that depended on the patient seeing the doctor for two appointments in as many days, which the patient did not attend, the doctor had a professional obligation to call the cops at that point and was negligent in not doing so. She didn't kill the patient -- she failed to prevent that which was preventable by doing what her job required her to do. She made a mistake in judgment.
that is a difficult claim to establish, to be sure. it is what I would call a very close case. the deciding factors may or may not appear in the doctors records, if any. Or the dispositive facts might be adduced through expert testimony or other testimony.
even assuming the claim could succeed, I think the real question is whether it is worth establishing at all. I've answered that question long ago for myself and it is a firm no. I think it would be a long, terrible experience to undertake this lawsuit. Is that the right way to look at it?
so I'm trying to get to what is actually at issue -- your point is valid under different circumstances.
that she and the psychiatrist got it wrong seems self evident. they thought he'd keep his promise not to do anything until he met with the doctor. that was a misjudgment.
the question remains unanswered as to whether under all the facts it was a reasonable mistake to make.
I don't think it was. I know at least three other psychiatrists and a psychologist very familiar with the facts and the people involved who agree it was clearly the wrong decision not to intervene.
yet still I do not want to proceed.
the fact that others in my family do seem to want to go forward is making me lose sleep, pacing at night, trying to find a way to reconcile their emotions, mine, and what I know the ordeal would be.
you see how hard it is to get people on the same sheet of music here -- it is never easy among family in my experience.
I do not need to think I am right; I only have to find the path causing the least damage to the family. I don't think you heal anything by suing someone.
Money cannot fill the hole in our lives. Trouble caused the one who made a mistake won't bring him back. I don't want to mourn for the rest of my life.
08 Jun 09
1 edit
Originally posted by ScriabinWhy should you do something you don't want to do with this? If the rest of the family respects you then they will respect your decision to not proceed with it. If your family decides to go forward, they can consult a lawyer that would be willing to take the case. If I was on the jury I would have a difficult time with what you have shared so far that money would help with the loss. Was this person a provider? How much did he provide. What kind of guidelines is there for determining pain and suffering? The doc made a mistake that he or she will not likely to repeat. Was the doc working for a large organization or small practice? Is the doc covered by insurance? Will the doc settle out of court? How will the family feel if they don't win the case? If the family wins, how will they feel about spending the money that was recieved related to the death of a loved one? These are just questions I ask myself if in your shoes. I would probably go with what is the best outcome based on your knowledge of all factors combined. Everyone else needs to respect your decision even if it is a winnable case.
no, you shouldn't.
however, in a case of medical malpractice, the claim would not be based on the idea the defendant doctor was responsible for the death.
the claim would be that given the doctor's knowledge of the patient's intent, given the existence of an agreement between them that depended on the patient seeing the doctor for two appointments in o made a mistake won't bring him back. I don't want to mourn for the rest of my life.
08 Jun 09
2 edits
Originally posted by joe beysertaking those rather apt questions one by one, first, I should not do this if I don't want to -- and I do not intend to. I am going to try to stop this without it appearing to my wife and daughter that I'm simply dictating to them.
Why should you do something you don't want to do with this? If the rest of the family respects you then they will respect your decision to not proceed with it. If your family decides to go forward, they can consult a lawyer that would be willing to take the case. If I was on the jury I would have a difficult time with what you have shared so far that mone factors combined. Everyone else needs to respect your decision even if it is a winnable case.
next, I do not want them to go forward, regardless. I think of the damage to them, to us, such an undertaking over 2 or 3 years will cause, notwithstanding any success.
next, I agree that especially in a case of suicide of a child, even one 25 years of age, that an affluent, well-educated jury would not place much monetary value on this case. Your point is valid regarding help with the loss, for there is only pain and suffering to consider -- something most people in this area who are well-to-do are accustomed to either ignoring altogether or giving rather short shrift. As Harry Truman once said, if you want love in this town, get a dog. As to your next point, no he wasn't and probably never would be a provider for me and my wife and daughter -- quite the reverse, as would be quite apparent from his records. But this isn't a case that involves an award of money in compensation for anything tangible we may have lost. No matter what his potential earning power might have been, we'd have no legal right to expect anything from that so there would be no legal basis in tort for a monetary recovery to recompense us for that potential loss of income. It never would have been our income to expect.
I think there are no guidelines for pain and suffering, only past precedent; but clearly an excessive award in the view of the judge would be reduced by him/her at trial or subject to reduction or being vacated on appeal. I assume the Dr was covered at the time the claim accrued, and that her policy would be on the hook - but I do not know that. Settlement would not be up to the Dr, but rather to the insurance company and it would settle only if it had a realistic apprehension of losing the case -- which I think is a stretch here. I can't speak for my wife and daughter, for they are still in the anger mode, they want to hurt the Dr, they blame her, they can't get past that yet. They are only beginning to appreciate how sick he was -- it has only dawned on me fairly recently. I always thought we all could help him succeed as an independent adult. We never thought of him as he did of himself. I appreciate your final points -- they help reinforce my view that I'm not merely striking a pose, being a Buddist-wannabe, or whatnot. I haven't embraced some religious awakening and adopted universal forgiveness. I consider both on hard, practical, legal grounds, as well as from every angle I can so far discern that suing the Dr is the wrong thing to do for us, for me, my wife, and my daughter. I think it will cause more pain, not heal them. I don't know if it is a winnable case. The lawyer suggests it may be - but we do not yet know for we've not engaged experts nor sought records.
I'm opposed to even doing that on the grounds the entire process in and of itself cannot help us and can only cause us considerably more pain, win or lose.
Coming home tonight from dinner with friends far from our house, I drove past the cemetery entrance where he lies, under a mist-shrouded, full moon. It was warm here tonight and the scene was both peaceful and powerful evocative of all kinds of remembered times and of the portents found in so many books and entertainments we shared with him. It was as though I was waking to a reality of which I had not fully been aware. He isn't there.
All that he was and is was in the car with us, in us. That is going to have to be enough. No lawsuit can change that.
08 Jun 09
Scriabin,
I have read through this thread, and the only thing I can come up with is a question:
If you were simply an attorney—that is, an attorney who did this kind of work—without the particular personal considerations, would you take this case?
Having (finally) read Frankl, I am not sure that anything about this case furthers generating the kind of “meaning” (as Frankl used that word) that helps anyone. That is, I doubt that whether you do or do not continue in this case will have any real therapeutic value to anyone. (That said, if it has particular therapeutic value to you—which you have indicated it does not—then… Well, that does still not remove the above question.)
It seems to me your personal (and professional, as if they were separable!) conscience is involved here. Violating your own conscience cannot, in the end, help anybody. (How would you deal with that, in your relationship with those you love?)
So, there are really two questions:
(1) How does involving/not involving yourself further with this case reflect your personal and professional conscience?
(2) What will be the end result (for anyone/everyone involved) if you do not follow that conscience?
In sum, if you cannot in good conscience continue in this case, then you ought not to; if you do, even in consideration for loved ones, then I suspect you (and they) will regret it. I also suspect, on the basis of what you have posted here, that you are already aware of that.
You have a decision to make, and nobody can make it for you. (What did you say to me about the feeling involved in that kind of situation?) That is not, I know, helpful. If you do not want to continue in this case, then that is probably the best course—for everyone involved.
[I have not had your personal tragedy. I did have a decision to make that affected people—whom I loved and love—that was otherwise a bit similar. I have endured some continued rejection because of the decision that I made, and some eventual affirmation—in both cases from those very people, whom I love. Personally, I believe that I made the best decision, following my own conscience. I also believe that everyone involved is better off than if I had made another decision—whether they acknowledge that or not (and that is not just for my own “feeling better” about it).]
Be well, friend.
08 Jun 09
Originally posted by vistesdthanks, that's very helpful to me. I hadn't thought of this as a matter of conscience. But looking at it that way works for me. Unfortunately, it has not been my judgment that putting it in that frame for my wife and daughter is a good idea. If they were further along in their feelings, less angry, less interested in casting blame -- which to me is a form of trying to deny reality, or at least rebel against it -- but they are where they are. In coping with loss in life, I've not before encountered this kind of anger in others. My early expression of my view that we should not go after the Drs only served to cause my wife more pain, for she hadn't come to the same conclusion and rather resented my "deciding" the matter.
Scriabin,
I have read through this thread, and the only thing I can come up with is a question:
If you were simply an attorney—that is, an attorney who did this kind of work—without the particular personal considerations, would you take this case?
Having (finally) read Frankl, I am not sure that anything about this case furthers generating th ...[text shortened]... ge that or not (and that is not just for my own “feeling better” about it).]
Be well, friend.
So, I've chosen the path of going along with her to the extent of consulting a lawyer, sitting in and contributing -- even giving the appearance of wanting to proceed, providing any and all facts that could support a case. I felt that doing so would allow my wife to work through to a realization of how things really stood and that she'd wind up where I am.
I don't feel this way out of a concern we'd lose. I feel this way out of concern that win or lose, the process will cause irreparable harm to all of us.
Also, it seems to me that anger and the desire for revenge, to hurt the Dr one blames for being negligent and failing to save my son is a poor reason to file a lawsuit. All would be put through a wringer and none would come out better for it.
I think my wife is almost there with me. I do not know, however, how to deal with my daughter, who is still quite upset, misses her brother badly, and blames this Dr. The conversation I've not yet had with her will be one of the most challenging I might ever have with my one living child. She's such a good kid and the depth of her grief is something I so much regret she must bear in this way.
This is not an area of parenting I learned much about from my folks -- so I'm going to have to just think about it, and wing it.