“At post,” as in post-mortem. Excellent (albeit limited) interview (from Eric Turkewitz’s Deconstructing the Trial of Flea – Part 1 post) with the plaintiff’s attorney, Elizabeth Mulvey. Flea was going to have his character impeached because of a prior inconsistent statement from his blog. He got “bagged” on Nelson’s Pediatricts as the “bible of pediatrics” — reliance on an expert treatise. I guess us ER doctors will have to watch what we blog about PEPID (here and here).
meandering healthcare, law, technology…
-
Search
Archives
Categories
Translate
Connections
Friendfeed
Tags
apple arra brownfields certification cloud computing copyright data portability ehr emergency medicine emr EMTALA ethics facebook google government hie hipaa hit hitech hospitals insurance intellectual property interoperability iphone meaningful use medicare Medicine microsoft nursing open source phr physicians policy politics privacy quality reform rhio safety net satire security twitter uninsured video youtube-
Recent Posts
symtym © 2004–2009
{ 8 comments… read them below or add one }
I agree, as an attorney, I can tell you the Flea's case was fascinating. You are correct that the Flea has taken us to a new place in the law. He pushed the envelope. It was absolutely the wrong thing to do as a doctor defendant. As a spectator, it was like watching an accident as it was happening. The only thing more enticing might by an anonymous blog by a juror during a case. One can only hope. Here are more of my observations on the Flea and how the case was likely settled because of its facts as opposed to Flea's blog. http://www.poppelawfirm.com/blog/index.cfm?id=721
I agree, as an attorney, I can tell you the Flea’s case was fascinating. You are correct that the Flea has taken us to a new place in the law. He pushed the envelope. It was absolutely the wrong thing to do as a doctor defendant. As a spectator, it was like watching an accident as it was happening. The only thing more enticing might by an anonymous blog by a juror during a case. One can only hope. Here are more of my observations on the Flea and how the case was likely settled because of its facts as opposed to Flea’s blog. http://www.poppelawfirm.com/blog/index.cfm?id=721
“[I]t was like watching an accident as it was happening.” That was my very first impression—along with, this will end very badly.
“[I]t was like watching an accident as it was happening.” That was my very first impression—along with, this will end very badly.
I don't think an endorsement indicates that I accept uncritically the entire opus. I like lots of things, but that doesn't mean I like or agree with all of them.
I don’t think an endorsement indicates that I accept uncritically the entire opus. I like lots of things, but that doesn’t mean I like or agree with all of them.
Agree, but the risk is that you might contradict something you put in one forum (e.g., a blog) and later put in another forum (e.g., court). Consistency is what set Flea up for failure—we as physicians know exactly what he meant. The problem is how it is portrayed for the jury. If Flea did not settle the case, he would have had his character impeached with an inconsistent statement. Lethal? We will never know.
Agree, but the risk is that you might contradict something you put in one forum (e.g., a blog) and later put in another forum (e.g., court). Consistency is what set Flea up for failure—we as physicians know exactly what he meant. The problem is how it is portrayed for the jury. If Flea did not settle the case, he would have had his character impeached with an inconsistent statement. Lethal? We will never know.