Woman With A Disabled Husband And Two Disabled Children Fights ...

[exposem]

Follow the Money wrote:

<quoted text>We should just chill and say, "Thank G-d that isn't me".
All the goodies you mentioned would not pay for much medical care.
Can this woman be legally re-zoned as a health care facility? How many sick people does the law require?

You're right. I've got an ancient TV but I couldn't care less. I hope they win the lottery or barring that, they get enough help to stay where they want.

[larry g]

Candace wrote:

You know what Poolboy, I wouldn't begrudge these people any amenity that makes their life more bearable.
Shame on you.

a 20,000 pool ? please she does not need it

[exposem]

Follow the Money wrote:

<quoted text>
The Harvard Study which addressed medical errors didn't suggest surgical errors or drug addicted physicians as the big problem. Interestingly, the mistakes are much more basic.

Seems to me Harvard can't be considered an objective study since they have a medical school.

Once we have some transparency by opening the Data Bank, banning secret settlements and testing the urine of all doctors, then I would like to see a study compiled by an indifferent third party.

[exposem]

Follow the Money wrote:

<quoted text>But would that make the U.S. an ObamaNation?

lol, just as I was trying to rouse myself out of voter apathy (sigh). Obamma-lamma-ding-dong.

[exposem]

Moved out of Manchester wrote:

<quoted text>I mean, face it, adding ink to a page is a pretty infantile gesture.

Refusing to admit mistakes is infantile, also. Especially in health issues.

[exposem]

Follow the Money wrote:

Truthfully, docs sell each other out pretty quickly as expert witnesses to plaintiff's attorneys.

I guess for some doctors telling the truth is "selling out".

[exposem]

larry g wrote:

<quoted text>
a 20,000 pool ? please she does not need it

Many of us would have had a nervous breakdown already. Apparently she's stronger than many of us.

If those little conveniences and comforts help her out, then so what?

The pool was donated by a buddy. Haven't you ever gotten freebies from a buddy?

[Johnny Nuke em]

exposem wrote:

<quoted text>Many of us would have had a nervous breakdown already. Apparently she's stronger than many of us.
If those little conveniences and comforts help her out, then so what?
The pool was donated by a buddy. Haven't you ever gotten freebies from a buddy?

I got a BJ in an alley once. That was free

[exposem]

Follow the Money wrote:

Most kids going into medicine today really just want to do the work. The heyday of huge money and conspicuous spending is over.

I think the heyday is over for most of us. Recently it was in the newpaper that the government is thinking of putting out steel pennies and steel nickels like they did during WWll.

[exposem]

Johnny Nuke em wrote:

<quoted text>
I got a BJ in an alley once. That was free

Hope you've got great health insurance!

[larry g]

exposem wrote:

<quoted text>Many of us would have had a nervous breakdown already. Apparently she's stronger than many of us.
If those little conveniences and comforts help her out, then so what?
The pool was donated by a buddy. Haven't you ever gotten freebies from a buddy?

maybe the Buddy should have paid the mortgage or the taxes , instead of pool .
All the complaints I hear about welfare people
driving SUV's , don't make excuses for the not too smart woman

[Just another poster]

larry g wrote:

<quoted text>
maybe the Buddy should have paid the mortgage or the taxes , instead of pool .
All the complaints I hear about welfare people
driving SUV's , don't make excuses for the not too smart woman

You didn't bother to read the article did you?

[exposem]

larry g wrote:

<quoted text>
maybe the Buddy should have paid the mortgage or the taxes , instead of pool .
All the complaints I hear about welfare people
driving SUV's , don't make excuses for the not too smart woman

Let's all gaze into our crystal balls and see what the future holds.

[larry g]

Just another poster wrote:

<quoted text>
You didn't bother to read the article did you?

I read enough to know that she spent money on frills not bills

[Just another poster]

larry g wrote:

<quoted text>
I read enough to know that she spent money on frills not bills

What frills were those?

[Follow the Money]

exposem wrote:

<quoted text>Refusing to admit mistakes is infantile, also. Especially in health issues.

Refusing to admit any mistake is kinda infantile. But it is, unfortunately, human nature,
I feel bad that the woman in this thread is being attacked for a donated pool and kitchen while she is struggling to care for two handicapped children and spending her "spare time" with her sick husband. I don't believe she has made any mistakes in managing her home. It would be nice if kindness were the weapon of choice here. It would also be enlightening to see an accounting of exactly how many dollars she has saved the taxpayers by caring for her kids at home. This type of care is easily 7 figures annually per child.
I hope she has no time to read some of these remarks. They're hurtful and not particularly insightful.

[Follow the Money]

exposem wrote:

<quoted text>Seems to me Harvard can't be considered an objective study since they have a medical school.
Once we have some transparency by opening the Data Bank, banning secret settlements and testing the urine of all doctors, then I would like to see a study compiled by an indifferent third party.

Uh expose, it sure wasn't done with the help of anyone at the medical school. You can find the study; it is the only authoritative publication of its sort. The title is something like "To Err is Human". This article is used more in the law schools than anywhere else. Bill Clinton referred to it in the early-mid 1990's.
As to the settlement data in the databank--you must understand PLEASE the insurers cut deals with the plaintiffs lawyers. Did you consider that the lawyers may not want us to know how much they got and that's why it's sealed?
I wonder if you think routine urine testing should also be mandatory for teen drivers. Over 6000 of them die in cars each year.
In fact, the total number of traffic fatalities is seven times this. Cars kill more people than doctors. Hmmm

[larry g]

Just another poster wrote:

<quoted text>
What frills were those?

swimming pool , granite counter top and other
things mentioned in the article . Saving vs consumption

[Just another poster]

larry g wrote:

<quoted text>
swimming pool , granite counter top and other
things mentioned in the article . Saving vs consumption

Those were DONATED to the family - they didn't go out and buy them. The problem is, IF you had been paying attention to the article, the improvements to the home - a 3 foot deep theraputic pool, the kitchen makeover and the handicap accessible "frills" like lifts on tracks to make it easier to move handicapped adults have increased the taxes on the home. This family was getting along while the father was able to work 2 and 3 jobs. Now that he is handicapped as well and unable to work, they are faced with losing their home.

The family does have a big screen TV - looks like one that could be purchased for 600 or 700 dollars these days. It's not a plasma or LCD High definition flat panel - just a big old TV. So what kind of TV do you think would be OK for them to own? None perhaps?

Keeping the handicapped family members at home is saving the taxpayers of CT a PILE of money. But you are griping about things that were given to them by caring friends and neighbors. Really, you should be ashamed of yourself!

I guess if Extreme Makeover came and did that for the family, you'd be OK with it? Or would you be jealous of that too?

What "other things" by the way? You really didn't read the article did you???

[Follow the Money]

larry g wrote:

<quoted text>
swimming pool , granite counter top and other
things mentioned in the article . Saving vs consumption

OK Larry, hang on doll 'cause we're gonna be going fast here.
The donated improvements changed her assessment, which changed her taxes. You with me so far babe? Ok, "Savings" means what? The opposite of "spending" right? Ok. So this Mom is providing in home care to 2 very sick kids. Institutionalized, these 2 could easily consume --or spend--over a quarter million bucks a year in basic health care costs. That's if they just lay there and never get sick, which is not likely.
Sooooo, if she keeps them at home, how much did the taxpayers save? Message your response to this group of eagerly awaiting taxpayers.