Jury Duty

[Steve from Cleveland]

I don't know if it comes from watching too much Law & Order on TV, my philosophical studies (i.e. PHL of Law, etc), or what, but I have always been fascinated with the whole legal process...

First: It is not possible to watch too much Law and Order. I only question whether there is enough time in a human life to watch enough.

Second: You have a degree in Philosophy of Law? I did that before Law School. I did my Masters work in Ron Dworkin. What degree did you do, and on whose work did you focus? I'd like to read your work, if you were inclined to send some along. (I don't apologize for being a nerd. By now, you all know that about me.)

Let me be a bit more accurate... I do not have a degree in Phl of Law... I do have a B.A. of Philosophy. Currently, I am attending Cleveland State University (You may have heard of their Law school, Marshall College of Law or something to that effect), that's what the school's best known for). I am getting a Masters Degree in Philosphy (Bioethics concentration) and i'm currently studying for the GRE and getting together apps for Grad Schools for my Doctorate in Bioethics. That being said, one cannot JUST study in their area of specialty. I have taken Phl of Law, Jurisprudence, And Social, Political, and Legal PHL, as well as Business Law (for my business minor). So I do have some exposure to legal philosophy. As far as any of my work, most of it deals with Ethics (particualrly Bioethics) and the Master's program is pretty weak here, so I haven't really done much that I'm REALLY proud of, and I am not writing a thesis (which I realize now, was a HUGE mistake). I think I did a decent paper on Human Rights if you're interested in that. I'll look back on some stuff and see if I have anything else worth looking at.

I have read selected works by Aristotle, Lots of Hobbes (mainly because my prof. was a Hobbes scholar), Mill, Rousseau, Kant, Dewey, Dworkin, etc... No real focus in this area, kind of a shotgun approach to Legal Philosophy, as that was not my area of concentration...

Anyhow, That's my story, I'm sticking to it.

Except to ask this of you... I have often considered coming to Canada to get my Doctorate (since I'm studying, basically, ethics related to healthcare/medicine, I thought it might be beneficial to get some exposure to a different system/mentality. Could you direct me to any good schools up there which have programs in bioethics? The University of Guelph was about the only one that I found. Admittedly, I haven't done THAT much research. Thanks for any help!

Steve

[StoneMtn]

Well, Steve, I doubt I'm the right person to answer that one. As a former philosophy and law student, bioethics is really outside my expertise. (I touched on the area a little bit on the philosophical side, but not the science side of things.)

That said, "Heady Gouda" on this board (I believe) is finishing his Master of Science in that area right now and probably has some good info for you. (He just completed his thesis. The only thing I'm questioning is my own memory as to whether it really was bioethics or something similar.) You should send him a private topic, though, as I don't think he is on here all the time.

The other option I'd suggest is calling the Experimental Farm in Ottawa. The name is pretty self-explanatory, and as you can gather bioethics is their thing.

Good on you for studying all those philosophers without being forced to. I'm impressed.

[Steve from Cleveland]

Right on... Just wondered, I guess, if you knew of some really good schools for Philosophy in Canada, and then I can look into their specific Bioethics programs. I guess I could have just said that to begin with

I will try and get in touch with "Heady Gouda"

I did a search on the Experimental Farm, and this appears to be pretty much agricultural related? Although that is one small branch of Bioethics, not really my 'cup o' tea' so to speak. I'm really more interested in the clinical side of things. By this I mean ethical issues surrounding clinical research/trials, doctor/patient ethical issues, doctor/insurance co ethical issuse, patient/insurance co ethical issues, and my personal favourite (Though a bit morbid?) is counseling patients/families with end-of-life issues. This is something that can be immensely helpful to a family with a terminally ill patient, yet is often overlooked, and people are forced to make life/death decisions based on bad or misleading information. Often this results in regret about the way a situation was handled. Anyhow...

Steve

[StoneMtn]

Oh! I see.

I suggest contacting the Philosophy Department at University of Toronto. They have experts in that area and in my view are probably the top school in Canada for philosophy. (I didn't go there, so I'm not just touting my own alma mater.)

(I wish I could be of better and more specific help.)

sm

[Steve from Cleveland]

Thanks... That's actually very helpful.

[Dr_Evil_Mouse]

Wish I had time to get into the details in this thread. All that came to mind at first was another quote from my favourite quotable guy (HLM):

"Jury - A group of 12 people, who, having lied to the judge about their health, hearing, and business engagements, have failed to fool him."

[Calamity Jane]

S/C , a bioethicist, eh?

okay, then.

1) is it ethical to sell my frozen 4 year old placenta?

2) if yes, how much should I charge for it?

In all seriousness, Dave will soon respond with more info on his UofT department, which has lots of great cross-department-appointed faculty, basically allowing you to create your own field of study within the hugely broad umbrella of 'religion'. A friend of his did bioethics through this Centre for the Study of Religion and was snagged for a full time job in Edmonton ABD!!

[timouse]

S/C , a bioethicist, eh?

okay, then.

1) is it ethical to sell my frozen 4 year old placenta?

2) if yes, how much should I charge for it?

ethics shmethiks. let the market decide although in this instance, i'd be surprised if there were a market. not knocking the product at all, but more questioning the demand.

i'm pretty sure i've never uttered the phrase "damn. if only i had a frozen placenta i could fix this..." but i will sit back and watch the bids roll in

[Steve from Cleveland]

Yes indeed... That's the long-term goal anyway...

About your placenta... First of all, I wonder a bit about the how/why you have a frozen placenta, but I will work under the assumption of a home birth, and correct disposal methods of said placenta?!? Which, disturbingly, reminds me that I used to date a girl who's last name was Pacenta (minus the 'L'). Anyhow...

I would say that it depends on your motives? Are you selling it because you want to advance research? stem cell donation? Have clones? If for any of these reasons, I would say it is probably unethical to sell it. Why? Because your freezing it has probably destroyed any (what was at one time) usable genetic material. When things (cells) are frozen, little ice crystals form inside and expand outward, or form outside and expand inward, either of which scenario causes (as of now) irreversible damage to the cells. (Think freezer-burn) So if the buyer was intending to be purchasing 'viable genetic material' essentially you could sell him a bridge and he'd have about the same amount of what he was looking for. That being said, if buyer understood that I don't see why it would be unethical of you to sell it, unless your PERSONAL ethical beliefs prohibit it.

As far as what to charge, I think value is, ultimately, determined by the buyer, not by the seller... I would imagine SOMEONE would probably pay a pretty high price for it? A cannibal, perhaps? but really, I have no idea what you'd ask or how one might price such an item...

Now, of course, I'm also assuming that you are most likely kidding? But I think that if you were looking to sell it, the issues I mentioned (among MANY, MANY, others would need to be explored, befoure I could give my final analysis).

That being said, I look forward to hearing your placenta story?!? I think!?! and also look forward to hearing from Dave as well about any information he could provide me about UofT which has been recommended by many people to me already. Inter-disciplinary study sounds interesting, but not sure about doing it on the Doctoral level? I'm not sure who one would defend a dissertation to? Regardless I would be interested in hearing about it, and would also appreciate any info he could send my way about any Bioethics Program at UofT? And about any other schools he may know of that offer such a program...

Oh, and to all who responded to my information request, thank you... And I would almost certainly require that any potential school have a Medical School (preferably very good) in addition to a Bioethics program, as I am interested primarily in Clinical Bioethics...

Thanks so much!

Steve/Cleve

[StoneMtn]

That was an amazing reply.

... and by the way, U of T has a med school; no problem there.

[Calamity Jane]

steve, I'm sorry, I thought you were up to speed on my take-off from this thread , gone wacky, as threads round here will do...

okay, some may consider this an 'over share' and those easily grossed out are advised to stop reading NOW.......

I seriously have a 4 year old placenta in my freezer. And it occurs to me, that as we're moving at the end of the month, I can ignore this fact no longer!

the background: Leona Mae was a home birth, and in some weird by-law oversight, midwives are not licensed to carry "bio-medical waste" which is what a placenta is, I guess. She also assumed we might want to "do" something with it, so instructed Dave to get a tupperware container of some sort for it. He found one, with the lid indelibly marked "spagetti sauce" and that's what it was put in. the freezer was (supposed to be) a stop-gap solution until we figured out what the hell to do with it. (burying wasn't an option -- not enough green space where we are). But the stupidly hilarious thing is how friggen often the "spagetti sauce" lid fooled us!!!

"oh, there's spagetti sauce in here, you want that for dinner, hon?"

and I agree, great answer!!!

[Jaimoe]

Just wear a tie-dye to the interview.

[Steve from Cleveland]

and I agree, great answer!!!

Thank You, Thank You... I'll be here all week. Honestly, I wrote that with a dual purpose. Obviously I was trying to be somewhat humorous about the whole idea, but still take an honest look at some of the pertinent issues that would have to be explored...

Anyhow, as I've come to find out, some issues that come up when dealing with bioethical issues, as well as some of the results of one's conclusions are often extremely strange/unexpected/etc...

One example I constantly refer to was given to me by a TA of mine WAY back when I was at Ohio State studying engineering, and taking Ethics to boost my GPA... She was working in a hospital in a clinical bioethics situation... I'll try to keep it short, and I don't know all the details:

Patient, Ms. X has been seeking treatment at the hospital. The medical staff is pretty convinced that X has a VERY rare condition, which affects a MINUTE portion of the population. HOWEVER, she doesn't exhibit the most telltale symptom, which is some sort of lump in the brain, or tumor. The test used to diagnose this rare condition is extremely expensive, and the insurance company refuses to allow the test to be done, because of the cost, and (what they deem to be) the relative unlikeliness that X has this condition (because she has no tumor). Medical staff consults with Bioethicists, who, ultimately decide that it is, in this situation, permissible to be "less than honest" with the insurance company. So they tell the insurance company that after doing another CAT scan, they have indeed found a small lump in X's brain. Insurance Co. then finally approves the more expensive test. The doctors call X to schedule the test, and she doesn't understand why the insurance co has approved the test after fighting it for so long. So she calls to ask them. And they tell her, "well, it says here that the most recent CAT scan showed a significant brain tumor, and that is a condition that need be present to approve this test. Since you now, apparently have a brain tumor, we approved the test to see if it is (RARE CONDITION) or brain cancer." Or something like that. Anyhow, Patient X, now figuring that she is SURELY going to die, decides to speed the whole process up/take matters into her own hands/whatever. Anyhow, she takes her own life.

The trouble is that the doc's didn't tell her about this (the deception of the ins. co), because then EVERYBODY'S on the hook for fraud.

And she jumped to conclusions about her prognosis, without even asking the doc's.

And the insurance company (in my eyes) is ultimately at fault, because tests should be deemed necessary by DOCTORS, not by actuaries or insurance company workers reading actuary tables or whatever they're called. [color:purple]But, hey, we've got this whole healthcare thing figured out down here...

Just a single example of an actual case (though lacking on specifics), the decision reached, and the unfortunate (and certainly unforseen) outcome which resulted. UGH!

Anyhow, this was all before we passed the HIPAA act restricting medical information and privacy and such, so I don't really know that (at the time) there was anything illegal about essentially a phone operator telling someone they have a brain tumor...

But it does go to show that one must really rack one's brain trying to think of all kinds of different possibilities and whatnot when dealing with this stuff (especially with the life & death stuff)

And it also goes to show that insurance companies suck and should NOT be the ones to make decisions about medical care (or at least if they do that they should base them on doctors' decisions and not on statistics)...

Anyhow I'm shutting up now...

Except to note that this thread no longer appears to be about Jury Duty, and mention that this post is longer than I thought it would be or intended it to be.

Shut Up, Steve...

Fine, I will...

[Rob Not Bob]

"Just say you're prejudiced against *all* races" - Homer Simpson

[Dr_Evil_Mouse]

That's a keeper of a tale, SfC.

The trouble is that the doc's didn't tell her about this (the deception of the ins. co), because then EVERYBODY'S on the hook for fraud.

It reminds me, in an inverted way, of the story told by R.D. Laing about the time around the death of his daughter; in that case, she'd been clearly diagnosed as terminal, but nobody but her own father - doctors included - would come forward and tell her, since there was really nothing to be done. When he did tell her, what he found was a shitstorm from people who hated resented him for "robbing her of her innocence." For her part, she thanked him for it, and was able to come to peace with things before the end. He'd already come by that time in his life to a Nietzschean position on language, that it had originally been created for the purposes of lying, and that it's telling the truth that takes that much more effort.

Imagine a world with complete information and undistorted communication. But then, we'd hardly need things like juries, would we?

[Steve from Cleveland]

Although a world of "complete information and undistorted communication" might be desirable, or interesting from a thought-experiment point of view, it is hardly plausible...

As for the Laing story/example... This is a great example of the notion of "informed consent." Which essentially is a doctrine stating that a patient should have ALL the relevant (and pertinent) information regarding his care/prognosis/situation. This condition is necessary in order for her to make a 'rational' decision. Quite a while ago, I think, it was commonplace for doctors to NOT share terminal diagnoses with their patients (or, commonly, their families). This was done under the guise of "not wanting to add undue burden or hardship on the patient or their family," to say nothing about the possibility of them deciding to end it on their own terms.

Personally, I see that approach as heinous... I would WANT to know, and I would welcome the opportunity to make preparations for the end, you know calling old friends and saying good-bye, getting the financial/insurance aspect squared away, helping with funeral preparations (A lot of families get raked over the coals by funeral homes/directors, because it wasn't clear to them what their dead relative would have actually wanted. This quote was directed at my father when he buried his mother, my grandmother: "Really, Jerry, I can TELL how much you loved your mom. Don't you think she DESERVES a little better casket than this one?" Oh, yeah, asshole, like that $10,000 one over there with the gold trim. Fucker! I SERIOUSLY wanted to punch the fuckface in his fuck-face for implying that how much we spent on a casket is even remotely related to how much the departed was loved. I was LIVID... Anyhow, they just prey on one's emotions at that point and try to squeeze every last penny out of you, especially when there is life insurance (death benefit) being paid...

Well, I got off topic again, but what I was trying to say is that in the past, the common notion was that it would be somehow 'easier' for the patient and/or their family if terminal diagnoses were kept quiet. Thankfully, we live in a time where now (for the most part) the thinking is 'honesty is the best policy' at least with respect to communication between doctors and patients.

S/C

[Dr_Evil_Mouse]

Very true.

And,

Although a world of "complete information and undistorted communication" might be desirable, or interesting from a thought-experiment point of view, it is hardly plausible...

Of course. And I don't know what I'd do if I were suddenly robbed of any reason to be bitter, cynical, or pessimistic .