----- Original Message -----
From: "Stephen Hughes"
> it addresses whether or
> not we have wider responsibilities outside of our departments. I dont
> think we do over and above anyone else's. In other words, one's duties
> are those of any other member of the public to assist with upholding the
> law.
Precisely, which is why I feel this case was not relevant to a medical list.
I can understand our interest in generic medical issues such as; do airbags
cause more harm than good? how do you deal with 14 year-olds who are
intoxicated in your department etc etc? We see such cases regularly, the
former being of academic interest, the latter much more pragmatic. But this
particular case was highly idiosyncratic - I can't remember ever seeing a
child injured as its father was showing off on his motorbike riding over
speedbumps, and if I ever do it'll probably be the first and last time in my
career. Furthermore the case debated occured purely in the public arena,
rather than after the event if and when the child pitched up in hospital
(which might then be relevant). So debating this matter struck me as a
rather bizarre use of time and bandwidth on a medical list. It seemed
particularly inopportune given that only days before some contributors to
the list were complaining about the relevance of discussing alcohol
intoxication in our patients. But at least the latter is a recurring problem
in our departments, unlike the case described. If I have concerns about such
an idiosyncratic and non-medical situation, and I often do, then I'll ask my
colleague/my partner/my "mother"! I would not ask the List.
Adrian Fogarty (still on wrong side of bed - will try again tomorrow)
|