- Family Elder
- Posts: 3764
- Joined: Wed Mar 17, 2010 3:00 pm
- Location: Kanata, Ontario, Canada
I think that the sentence about ‘killing’ is not part of the neurologist quotation, but I do believe that much real harm is being done by the neurologist’s words to his patients. In fact if I were one of them I would greatly fear for his sanity and my own safety. If I were a loved one I would insist that the patient go nowhere near this person again.A Canadian neurologist recently said the following: "Some of the interventionalists like Dr Sandra McdDonald in Barrie have maintained that the problem is vascular, not neurological, so they should be permitted to proceed with diagnosis and management
Since we are the ones doing all the 'killing', we should at least be the ones deciding how to stop it.
Sd that same Canadian neurologist wrote to his patients " Since death is also a risk, then I ask those individuals to strongly consider advising their family of an advanced directive for an autopsy. We should maximize every learning opportunity"'
Advising people in advance that their loved one will die, is playing God in the worst sense. Speaking as if an autopsy will be required (presumeably if they have the procedure for CCSVI) is deliberately lying, insensitive and brutally abusive in the extreme. The implication, completely false, is that the patient is taking a great risk with their life. "Fear, uncertainty and doubt" (FUD) is one thing, but self-serving, harmful lies are another.
It sounds intended to be provocative, but just comes across as cruel.
This person should not be allowed to have patients of any kind. He obviously has no interest in their welfare.
Whoever this is (and I think I am aware, having had personal dealings with someone with an identical "bedside manner") should apologize, and be sued by all recipients of this letter. I would be filing a class action.
Not a doctor.
Atheists can't become priests!
This country is working on perfecting stupidity and repeated mistakes.
- Similar Topics
- Last post