News:

And we're back!

Main Menu

The latest news on Michael Jackson

Started by Barrister, July 06, 2009, 11:19:55 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

Capetan Mihali

I think the ultimate point is that doctors are people as well as medical professionals, and prone to human emotions, attachments, and weaknesses. 

The doc didn't seem to act with gross clinical negligence or a wanton disregard for MJ's well-being. 

So you can distinguish it from a situation in which a doc forgot the surgical sponges or put the obviously wrong solution in the IV because he was drunk or just didn't give a shit. 

You can also distinguish it from the situation where a doc treated MJ's insomnia with the much more dangerous (in terms of overdose and dependency) barbiturates; or where he knew opiate prescriptions would mask a bunch of psychological and physical problems, and then got MJ addicted with a huge tolerance.

Off-label prescribing is enormous in the US (I think Neurontin is prescribed about 90% off-label) and there is nothing wrong with that.  Propofol is a little more extreme, but I don't see the doc acting with callousness or recklessness or apathy or active bad intents.
"The internet's completely over. [...] The internet's like MTV. At one time MTV was hip and suddenly it became outdated. Anyway, all these computers and digital gadgets are no good. They just fill your head with numbers and that can't be good for you."
-- Prince, 2010. (R.I.P.)

DGuller

Quote from: Capetan Mihali on November 07, 2011, 09:48:11 PM
Poor Doc.  I don't think anyone among us could have denied Michael his "milk" (propofol) when he begged for it to find peace in the abyss of dreamless sleep.  He wasn't keeping MJ doped up out of his mind on painkillers or whatever, he was just helping him live out his sad life.
You are assuming that he wasn't hired or retained in the first place because of his willingness to give Jackson whatever he wanted.  He cashed in rather nicely, while I assume a number of more ethical doctors did their ethical duty and turned down the payday.

Capetan Mihali

#122
Quote from: DGuller on November 08, 2011, 02:31:11 AM
Quote from: Capetan Mihali on November 07, 2011, 09:48:11 PM
Poor Doc.  I don't think anyone among us could have denied Michael his "milk" (propofol) when he begged for it to find peace in the abyss of dreamless sleep.  He wasn't keeping MJ doped up out of his mind on painkillers or whatever, he was just helping him live out his sad life.
You are assuming that he wasn't hired or retained in the first place because of his willingness to give Jackson whatever he wanted.  He cashed in rather nicely, while I assume a number of more ethical doctors did their ethical duty and turned down the payday.

Yes, that's a possibility.  But giving Jackson what he wanted appears to have been just giving him something to knock him unconscious so he could get a few hours of sleep.  That's why I emphasize the weirdness of propofol vs. standard drugs of abuse (Oxy, Opana, Percocet, Xanax bars, etc.)

EDIT:  I'm also not sure that a doctor has an ethical obligation to turn down a prospectively difficult and lucrative patient; maybe that obligation attaches when the doctor-patient relationship becomes too strained.  I'm also not convinced that a lapse in medical ethics (really misprescribing one drug) is worthy of a manslaughter conviction.
"The internet's completely over. [...] The internet's like MTV. At one time MTV was hip and suddenly it became outdated. Anyway, all these computers and digital gadgets are no good. They just fill your head with numbers and that can't be good for you."
-- Prince, 2010. (R.I.P.)

DGuller

I'm sure not calling 911 for 20 minutes while your patient is dying had something to do with it as well.

crazy canuck

Quote from: Capetan Mihali on November 08, 2011, 01:45:37 AM
The doc didn't seem to act with gross clinical negligence or a wanton disregard for MJ's well-being. 

Wanton disregard isnt the test nor is clinical negligence.  You are right that the other examples you cited dont apply.  But that doesnt matter.  The defence was the Jackson injected himself.  The defence then put itself in the difficult spot of trying to explain why Jackson had access to this very dangerous drug so he could inject himself.

Prima Facie allowing unsupervised access to the drug seems to be negligent.

Razgovory

Quote from: DGuller on November 08, 2011, 02:31:11 AM
Quote from: Capetan Mihali on November 07, 2011, 09:48:11 PM
Poor Doc.  I don't think anyone among us could have denied Michael his "milk" (propofol) when he begged for it to find peace in the abyss of dreamless sleep.  He wasn't keeping MJ doped up out of his mind on painkillers or whatever, he was just helping him live out his sad life.
You are assuming that he wasn't hired or retained in the first place because of his willingness to give Jackson whatever he wanted.  He cashed in rather nicely, while I assume a number of more ethical doctors did their ethical duty and turned down the payday.

Ethical doctors are hard to find.
I've given it serious thought. I must scorn the ways of my family, and seek a Japanese woman to yield me my progeny. He shall live in the lands of the east, and be well tutored in his sacred trust to weave the best traditions of Japan and the Sacred South together, until such time as he (or, indeed his house, which will periodically require infusion of both Southern and Japanese bloodlines of note) can deliver to the South it's independence, either in this world or in space.  -Lettow April of 2011

Raz is right. -MadImmortalMan March of 2017

The Brain

He was hired because he was black. Which doesn't make any sense but there you go.
Women want me. Men want to be with me.

The Minsky Moment

Quote from: crazy canuck on November 08, 2011, 10:43:57 AM
Wanton disregard isnt the test nor is clinical negligence.   . . . Prima Facie allowing unsupervised access to the drug seems to be negligent.

? I am confused about what you are saying the standard is.  AFAIK involuntary manslaughter in CA requires proof of criminal negligence, which is akin to gross negligence, not simple negligence.  In the CA model criminal jury instructions, the jury is instructed that they must find the defendant acted recklessly, or "so different from the way an ordinarily careful person would act in the same situation that his or her act amounts to disregard for human life or indifference to the consequences of that act." 

So wanton disregard is pretty close to the test.
The purpose of studying economics is not to acquire a set of ready-made answers to economic questions, but to learn how to avoid being deceived by economists.
--Joan Robinson

crazy canuck

Quote from: The Minsky Moment on November 08, 2011, 01:47:24 PM
Quote from: crazy canuck on November 08, 2011, 10:43:57 AM
Wanton disregard isnt the test nor is clinical negligence.   . . . Prima Facie allowing unsupervised access to the drug seems to be negligent.

? I am confused about what you are saying the standard is.  AFAIK involuntary manslaughter in CA requires proof of criminal negligence, which is akin to gross negligence, not simple negligence.  In the CA model criminal jury instructions, the jury is instructed that they must find the defendant acted recklessly, or "so different from the way an ordinarily careful person would act in the same situation that his or her act amounts to disregard for human life or indifference to the consequences of that act." 

So wanton disregard is pretty close to the test.

Pretty close is good enough for nuclear weapons.


The Larch

Quote from: Capetan Mihali on November 08, 2011, 12:55:12 AMIIRC, Michael had debilitating insomnia that didn't respond to all the benzos, and thought he needed the propofol to get some sleep.  (By all accounts it worked very well since it is a surgical anesthetic.)  Of course, propofol is not normally administered outside the hospital, but they had apparently been using it with such success that Michael called it his milk and would plead for it to get to sleep.

That's the red flag, besides any other possibilities. Using an anesthetic intended for surgeries as if it was a sleeping pill is a huge no-no already.

jimmy olsen

It is far better for the truth to tear my flesh to pieces, then for my soul to wander through darkness in eternal damnation.

Jet: So what kind of woman is she? What's Julia like?
Faye: Ordinary. The kind of beautiful, dangerous ordinary that you just can't leave alone.
Jet: I see.
Faye: Like an angel from the underworld. Or a devil from Paradise.
--------------------------------------------
1 Karma Chameleon point

Tamas


Syt

The Michael Jackson Tribute seems to have fizzled out completely.

To recap, one of the Jackson brothers, with a local organizer who had him in his pocket, wanted to hold a tribute a month or so after his death here in Vienna, in front of Schönbrunn Castle. He first didn't have any line up at all, then announced a number of big name stars (all of which publically denied any such claims), had to return a lot of tickets, and basically, the whole thing crashed and burned a week before the scheduled date.

It was a rather fascinatingly depressing-hillarious freak show to watch.

The Jackson brother blamed the City of Vienna (their representatives shrugged) and announced a new tribute to be held on the On Year Anniversary of His Michaelness' Death in London. It seems nothing ever came off that, either.
I am, somehow, less interested in the weight and convolutions of Einstein's brain than in the near certainty that people of equal talent have lived and died in cotton fields and sweatshops.
—Stephen Jay Gould

Proud owner of 42 Zoupa Points.