•    Mass Extermination is Not Euthanasia   

    Scales of Balanced Justice

    TO:  All Media Outlets & WSYR Channel 9 News

    RE:  Stop Calling Mass Extermination & Genocide Euthanasia

    Abstract: In order to protect animals from abuse – we must first be candid and HONEST about what abuses are routinely taking place right under our noses. Typically, the media lacks this kind of candor and honesty. But HERE we disclose the naked, lamentable TRUTH lurking behind the whitewash media euphemisms.

    The term “Euthanasia” is being abused on a massive epidemic scale. And it doesn’t seem to matter whether it’s erudite, highly educated professional journalists at the New York Times \ Washington Post or recent high school grads at the local newspaper. This term is being misused to describe killing that does not qualify as “Euthanasia.” Even many animal rights activists and no-kill animal shelters can often be heard abusing this counterfeit term (it’s a counterfeit term when used to describe genocide).

    So the task here is to understand WHY this is happening on such a massive scale. This entails identifying the reasons for — the “causes” of — this pernicious, intractable practice of fraudulently labeling genocide. Such an inquiry leads us to two primary reasons for the fraudulent abuse of the term “Euthanasia”:  1) Definition Confusion; 2) The deliberate, calculated, intentional effort to deceive, conceal, distort, misrepresent, and candy-coat acts of killing that are deemed so morally unacceptable that society would be sickened, outraged and appalled if they knew the ‘truth’ — so those who commit those acts are bent on concealing the ‘truth’ with lies, half-truths, fraudulent counterfeit terms and euphemisms.  Regarding this second reason, a profoundly bizarre phenomena has wrapped itself around the initial core problem, by way of by-stander witnesses and journalists, analysts and experts, academics and pundits — who are complicit, unwittingly or not, in the conspiracy to deceive. Perhaps it’s a journalist who feels obliged to regurgitate the terms handed to him (this is not journalism it’s a secretary “taking dictation”) or perhaps it’s an entrenched favorable bias for the accused killer(s).  The bottom line is that there are a wide variety of reasons for engaging in the deception, which range from political and moral to economic and judicial.

    Media accounts about the mass slaughter of Canadian Geese in New York kept calling it “Euthanasia.” The Media stories I’m referring to repeatedly talked about the mass “Euthanization” of Canadian Geese for a variety of alleged reasons ranging from “over population” (a human convenience standard) to “nuisance eye-sore” (a human convenience standard) to air traffic safety (another human convenience standard). Mass Extermination is Not Euthanasia and it never will be — no matter how many times a society or a Hitler butcher’s the human language to make that claim.

    The term “Euthanize” only applies when it is done SOLELY for the benefit of the Euthanized animal or person, to alleviate excruciating, unrelenting pain and suffering of that animal or person, and only where that animal is in an irreversible terminal medical condition, where there is no hope of recovery and the pain and suffering is both pointless and inhumane (pointless in the sense that it is NOT pain briefly endured during a recovery period). In such cases Euthanasia is a last resort because they cannot be medically cured of their injuries, disease or illness and they are suffering enormous pain from their incurable illness.  (fn 2 & 7).

    Virtually every respected dictionary and encyclopedia defines Euthanasia as:  “the act or practice of killing or permitting the death of hopelessly sick or injured individuals (as persons or domestic animals) in a relatively painless way for reasons of mercy.” (Miriam-Webster & Encyclopedia Britannica – fn 2 & 7). Sometimes referred to as “Mercy Killing,” it is unmistakably clear that the sole purpose of the mercy killing is to alleviate the needless, excruciating and extreme suffering of the terminally ill creature being killed. With true Euthanasia – the creature being killed is the SOLE beneficiary.   There is no other ‘ulterior’ motive — no other intended beneficiary — no other collateral purpose or interest being served when TRUE “Euthanasia” is implemented.

    It is imperative that we understand the profoundly Dark History entailed by the abuse and misuse of the term “Euthanize.”  It has deep roots in the Nazi propaganda machine that served Hitler’s “Final Solution” for achieving genetic purity of the race (Eugenics Program), as they too sought to clear the streets of the ‘rift-raft’ — the physically disabled, the mentally disabled, the elderly, the gays, the gypsies, the Jews and the non-Aryans — just as society today seeks to clear the streets of the ‘rift-raft’ — the homeless wandering dogs and cats deemed to be a ‘nuisance’ and an eye-sore. Hitler and the Nazi Regime called this genocide plan the “T4 Euthanasia Program”  (fn 3-6).

    Hitler knew that if he called it what it really was, “Extermination,” there would have been a mass revolt. But Hitler noticed that the animal shelters routinely abused and misused the counterfeit term “Euthanasia” to describe the wholesale slaughter of healthy animals — merely because they could not find homes for them and they were perceived as a ‘nuisance’. And Hitler immediately realized that society had completely accepted this fraudulent, wholly inappropriate use of this counterfeit term. So he shrewdly falsified what he was doing by calling his genocidal extermination plan the “T4 Euthanasia Program” knowing that most people deem Euthanasia to be a compassionate ‘humanitarian’ act of kindness and benevolence, rather than a ruthless, senseless, sociopathic genocide.  (fn 3-6). It is imperative that we never, ever forget the enormous danger and dire consequences emanating from the desensitization of a society through the constant, routine, calculated falsification of the meaning of the term Euthanasia. We simply cannot allow this term to be hijacked and bastardized, yet again, by a similar brand of sociopaths.

    Killing one being, taking one life, solely for the benefit of ‘another’ (namely the ones doing the killing) is NOT, I repeat, is NOTEuthanasia” in any sense of that term and that term should never, ever be used to describe such conduct.

    Media accounts about the mass slaughter of Canadian Geese in New York kept calling it “euthanasia.” It would appear that all those engaged in this “Mass Extermination Program” and all those in the media reporting about it, are acutely aware of how immoral, inexcusable, unethical, unjustifiable, reprehensible and indefensible this “Mass Extermination Program” really was, otherwise there would be no need to cover it up with fraudulent, sham euphemisms, as the Nazi’s did. If the Extermination of the Canadian Geese is so defensible and honorable and morally justifiable, then come right out and call it exactly what it is — the Mass Extermination & Genocide of perfectly healthy Canadian Geese purely for human convenience reasons, and in no way is it Euthanasia for the benefit of the geese.

    These geese were “Exterminated” purely for human convenience, and that makes the term “Euthanize” totally inapplicable and reprehensible. The ‘human convenience’ is that the humans saved themselves the time, the expense and inconvenience of solving the Canadian Geese problem in an intelligent, non-violent, humanitarian manner. One way or another, this ‘rift-raft’ was going to be discarded — either to a relocation center or to an incinerator. They chose the lazy, unintelligent, sociopathic, ruthless solution — the ‘incinerator’ method, just as Hitler’s “Final Solution” did.

    Killing one being, taking one life solely, for the benefit of ‘another’ (namely the ones doing the killing) is called social engineering “EXTERMINATION” — regardless of whether the killing ‘method’ is deemed to be humane. It is precisely what Hitler’s Nazi Regime did with humans — they “EXTERMINATED” them for the twisted perceived benefit of society (the Supreme Aryan Race) under his demented social engineering notion of a genetically pure race of human beings.  (fn 3-6). The mass slaughter of perfectly healthy beings — merely because they are deemed to be rift-raft — a ‘nuisance’ — How does that ever, EVER come to be described as “Euthanasia?”

    Therefore the media and everyone else should STOP calling these Mass Extermination & Genocide crusades “Euthanasia” since that term absolutely does NOT apply. And the fact that this term does NOT apply is not a gray-area of uncertainty or a debatable point today any more than it was when Hitler deliberately and strategically abused the term to facilitate his Mass Extermination & Genocide agenda. Take a good hard look at these words — Mass Extermination & Genocide — because that is what humans have been doing to animals at kill-shelters — NOT “Euthanasia” as everyone is fraudulently claiming.

    Definition Confusion:  This is the most common reason for the general population — which could include many thoughtless journalists, commentators, pundits and observers who adopted the counterfeit use of the term Euthanasia without ever giving it a second thought — without ever giving it any kind of scrutiny whatsoever. This is particularly astonishing, given how terribly simple and obvious the error is. People have come to erroneously believe that if someone kills in a manner that causes no pain or trauma — if someone kills “humanely” — then it is Euthanasia. So the animal kill-shelter that kills 3,000 perfectly healthy cats each year because they couldn’t find homes for them — they are said to have “Euthanized” the cats merely because they did it in a humane manner.

    The point is that many people erroneously think that the definition for “Animal Euthanasia” is “when an animal is humanely killed” — i.e., when the killing ‘method’ is deemed to be humane.  That is 10 million light-years from the true definition. And just a modest amount of simple common-sense is all that is needed to discover the error. There is no separate definition for human animals versus non-human animals. The term “Euthanize” is the same for each. To uncover the truth simply try applying the erroneous definition to a variety of different, yet comparable, circumstances. Suppose a disgruntled neighbor injects your happy, healthy pet with the same drug that kill-shelters use to kill cats — does that make the killing of your pet Euthanasia? Of course not. In the U.S. many death-row inmates are executed by humane methods (according to the U.S. Supreme Court) each year and no one is suggesting that the inmates were “Euthanized.” Slaughter houses claim that they kill millions of animals each year by ‘humane methods’ — while federal, state and local governments have concurred that the killing methods are humane. Yet no one is calling this Euthanasia. They correctly refer to it as the wholesale “slaughter” of animal life.

    Animal shelters that kill thousands of healthy cats and dogs each year because they cannot find homes for them are called “kill-shelters.” Animal shelters that do not are called “no-kill” shelters. Yet the media and the kill-shelters and the public — and even many no-kill shelters — will refer to the kill-shelter killings as “Euthanizing” those perfectly healthy cats and dogs. This is a case where common usage has completely jumped the tracks, so that a term has come to mean its exact opposite. But we can’t be complacent about the abuse of THIS term because it has a profoundly dark history — tracing back to Hitler’s “T4 Euthanasia” program — which in truth was the “Final Solution’ extermination program. We simply cannot allow this term to be hijacked and bastardized, yet again, by a similar brand of psychopaths. Or even by unwitting dolts.

    Animal Shelters – Animal Rights Groups:  What is most unfathomable is the fact that many animal shelters and animal rights groups have so unwittingly signed-on to this grotesque abuse of the term Euthanasia. You hear it most often when they talk about their noble and admirable “mission” to significantly “reduce the number of cats and dogs Euthanized each year.” The twisted irony is that when the term is fraudulently misused in this way it is weaponized as a euphemism in order to falsify, distort, conceal and candy-coat the reality of what is actually taking place — the wide-scale SLAUGHTER, KILLING, EXTERMINATION of perfectly healthy animals by the thousands — by the millions — merely because society has determined they are a “rift-raft” nuisance eye-sore in the neighborhood communities. What many animal shelters and animal rights groups have failed to realize is that by weaponizing the term as a euphemism it has made it infinitely EASIER for people to abandon pets and to sweep the neighborhoods clean of the nuisance rift-raft — because “Euthanasia is such a kind, compassionate, caring, benevolent thing to do to animals.” What a bitter, brutal irony that is. And so many members of these groups are completely clueless — oblivious of this undeniable horrific consequence of routinely acquiescing to the abominable torture and abuse of the term “Euthanasia.” Even the notorious PETA organization often abuses this term. The blistering irony is that Hitler’s propaganda campaign to trivialize his extermination program as merely Euthanasia was stolen from the animal shelters’ playbook of flagrant, perpetual abuse of that term to describe the routine wholesale slaughter of thousands of perfectly healthy animals — at what they disgustingly called “shelters” for homeless animals. The term “shelter” — when not fraudulently hijacked — usually means “safe haven” — “refuge of protection.”

    Animal Shelters – Animal Rights Groups:  What animal shelters and animal rights groups should realize is that they, themselves, invariably use the terms “kill-shelter” and “no-kill shelter.” These terms are universally recognized by these groups. They do NOT use the terms “euthanasia-shelter” and “non-euthanasia-shelter.” So there is already this very feint, hazy, inarticulate recognition that what’s really going on is the wide-scale SLAUGHTER, KILLING, EXTERMINATION of perfectly healthy animals — NOT the kind, compassionate, caring, benevolent “euthanizing” of animals. The message here is unmistakably clear. If you want to truly educate the public about the importance of being responsible pet owners — STOP falsifying and candy-coating the enormous dire consequences guaranteed to result from ‘irresponsible’ pet ownership — namely — “the wide-scale SLAUGHTER, KILLING, EXTERMINATION of perfectly healthy animals.” Actually, the expression “kill-shelter” is a fallacious contradiction in terms. If it is a killing fields animal warehouse facility — it most definitely is NOT a “shelter.”

    Either this action is justifiable when we call it exactly what it is (Mass Extermination & Genocide) or it is NOT justifiable when we call it exactly what it is (Mass Extermination & Genocide). In either case, falsifying the accounts of what is taking place by deliberately using what, ipso facto, is a patently fraudulent, inaccurate counterfeit term (“Euthanasia“) to misrepresent what is going on, is most definitely morally and ethically and logically repulsive, wrong and logically\morally indefensible. If it is too horrible and too ugly and too disturbing to think about what it really is (Mass Extermination & Genocide) then clearly it is something humans should NOT be doing.

    We urge the media to STOP calling these Mass Extermination & Genocide crusades “Euthanasia.”   Just because some business or government entity attempts to defraud the media with a counterfeit term, does not mean the media is licensed or obliged to pass that fraud onto the general public as though it had legal tender status. We simply cannot afford to have the media, the Fourth Branch of Government, constantly falling asleep at the wheel, shirking its responsibility to the truth, sucking down every flim-flam sham counterfeit term that some fast-talking, sociopathic snake-oil salesman decides to panhandle — and then dispensing that fraudulent tripe to the public as though it was the Gospel truth. 98% of what humans consume from the media is NOT verbatim quotes, but rather, paraphrased summaries — it’s an editorial license to paraphrase. We implore the media to exercise an honest, ethical standard of human decency and refuse to paraphrase “Mass Extermination & Genocide” as “Euthanasia.” We urge the media to question those who dispense the fraudulent use of the term and to challenge the appropriateness of the term. And where it is necessary to include the inappropriate use of the term in a direct quote — the media should realize it is entirely appropriate, if not obligatory, to subsequently point out that the known facts are at odds with the authentic true meaning of that term.

    We urge the mass media — Please tell all news writers and reporters to STOP misusing and misapplying this term “Euthanasia” and call the routine wholesale slaughter of perfectly healthy animals what it really is — Mass Extermination.  STOP being the complicit hand-maidens of dishonest entities seeking to distort, conceal and falsify the truth in a determined effort to defraud and deceive the public.
            (see footnotes for authority and links below that provide correct, accurate lexical definition and use of the term “Euthanasia“).
    Reflecting Pool Discourse Blog

    Human Dishonesty Against Animals
    A Reflecting Pool Discourse Blog Website

    The sub-heading for this CBS News whitewash story reads: “Mass Euthanization of Geese a Step in Goal of Clearing Geese Within 7 Miles of JFK and LaGuardia Airport.


    The Reflecting Pool Discourse Blog

  •    The Politics of Tort Reform
        A Trojan Horse with Bad Intentions

    Scales of Balanced Justice

    Yes, the title is redundant twice over again.

    Whooops - Did I just re-redundance that redundancy?

                But the central point and the inherent dangers of Tort Reform proposals are worth stressing. This is a topic about which the general public is woefully misinformed and uninformed.

    The legal term “Torts” refers to a class of civil actions related to wrongful death or injury lawsuits, where the death and/or injuries were caused by the negligent or reckless or deliberate actions of another who had a legal duty NOT to act negligently or recklessly or who had a legal duty NOT to intentionally harm the person or property of another (a duty to use Due Care). The most common examples of Tort Actions are: Medical & Legal Malpractice, Wrongful Death actions, Personal Injury cases.

    Over the past decade or so, a virulent movement has gathered strength, to put serious limits and restrictions on Tort Actions, initially singling-out Medical Malpractice cases for these severe litigation restrictions. The reason? Tort Reform proponents claim they need Tort Reform restrictions because litigation, they claim, is to blame for the enormously high cost of medical services in this country. They blame the injured victim (the Plaintiff) and their attorneys for the high cost of medical services and medical care in the United States. Tort Reform proponents claim that by severely limiting a victim’s ability to recover damages for medical malpractice conduct that causes wrongful death and/or injuries, the costs of medical services and medical care will become lower and will stop skyrocketing as it has for many decades. Of course, one could also argue that by closing down all prisons and releasing all inmates, our taxes would be much lower. But common sense tells us this is NOT an option we should seriously consider. Unfortunately, ‘common sense’ is in short supply when it comes to the issue of “Tort Reform Legislation.”

    To support their claims, most Tort Reform advocates cite extremely rare case anomalies like the “Hot Coffee” case, where someone sued a fast-food chain because they were scalded by a cup of hot coffee they purchased at a take-out window. In short, Tort Reform proponents argue that the medical profession has been besieged by an avalanche of “frivolous” litigation which is solely or primarily responsible for causing the enormously high costs of medical services and medical care in the United States.

    Virtually everyone agrees that the cost of medical services and medical care in the United States is outrageously HIGH. And most everyone agrees that the cost of medical services and medical care in the United States is continuing to skyrocket beyond the reach of many Americans. The critical question, however, is: “What are the leading, primary “causes” for this runaway inflation of medical costs?” Is malpractice litigation significantly responsible for this intractable skyrocketing increase in medical costs?

    A sober, honest examination of the leading, primary causes of these skyrocketing costs reveals that litigation is NOT to blame, while a host of adverse conditions within the medical services industry ARE directly and primarily to blame for the runaway inflation in medical costs.


    Statistics and litigation data conclusively show that the number of cases litigated and the malpractice awards being handed-out in tort litigation has NOT significantly increased in several decades, while the costs of medical services and medical care HAVE continued to skyrocket enormously during this same period, as everyone well-knows. Obviously, this would NOT be the case if litigation was the leading, primary cause of this runaway inflation. If tort litigation was the leading, primary cause of skyrocketing health care costs, then those health care costs would NOT have escalated for the past two decades in which tort litigation and the awards handed down did NOT increase.

    Furthermore, frivolous litigation rarely, if ever, wins at trial and the few that do win are essentially never upheld on appeal. Statistics show that the cases that do win, are cases where the negligent or reckless conduct was so outrageous, so irresponsible, that no “competent” doctor would ever have engaged in such conduct. As every lawyer well-knows, there are serious, formidable adverse financial consequences for both the attorney and the plaintiff, for engaging in “frivolous” litigation. Plaintiffs and their attorneys are held financially liable for the defendant’s legal costs and expenses, where the plaintiff loses a frivolous action. Even if the litigation is NOT deemed to be frivolous, the plaintiff can be held liable for all litigation costs and expenses of a prevailing defendant doctor, under a number of common circumstances. In fact, even if the Plaintiff wins the litigation, that Plaintiff could end up being liable for all court and litigation costs and attorney fees if the award amount is not a certain percentage higher than the pre-trial “Settlement Offer” made by a defendant. These myriad protections against frivolous litigation have been in effect in all states for many, many decades, and statistics consistently show that they have been highly effective in reducing frivolous litigation to negligible levels. Additionally, attorneys can suffer sanctions and lose their license to practice law for engaging in frivolous litigation.

    The real question to ask is this. If, as proponents claim, medical malpractice payouts are so abundant that it has become the leading cause of skyrocketing inflation for medical services, “WHY IS THERE SO MUCH MALPRACTICE BY DOCTORS?” (Plaintiffs do not win unless mapractice has occurred). Why is the AMA (American Medical Association) so militantly engaged in the practice of covering-up and concealing known prior instances of doctor incompetence and wrongful malpractice conduct? Why is the AMA NOT rigorously and diligently engaged in a stalwart effort to identify, disclose and weed-out incompetent doctors, especially repeat offenders? Why is it that a patient seeking vital information about a prospective doctor’s or surgeon’s malpractice misconduct history is met with a militant stonewalling response from the AMA when such information requests are submitted to the AMA? If malpractice payouts are the cause of skyrocketing malpractice insurance costs, as proponents claim, why doesn’t the AMA simply weed-out the incompetent offenders and distance itself from them, instead of rigorously and tenaciously shielding them and concealing known instances of misconduct? Any patient who has ever tried to investigate and research the credentials and medical practice history of a prospective doctor or surgeon KNOWS that the AMA is bent on stonewalling that effort, while desperately shielding doctors by concealing vital, known instances of misconduct.

    In a recent malpractice case, Michael Washington, a 70 year-old retired Air Force veteran, went to a veterans hospital for what was supposed to be a simple, routine 15-minute colonoscopy. After being quite ill for some time after the colonoscopy, he went to see an internal medicine physician who told him that he had contracted an active case of Hepatitis C “as a result of unsafe injection practices where [colonoscopy] syringes were reused instead of being disposed of.” (ABC News – “Malpractice Reform a Double-Edged Sword” – By Steven Jean and Kerry McIntosh – Aug. 20, 2009 – “http://abcnews.go.com/Health/HealthCare/story?id=8364959”). According to the ABC News story, “Some of the documents needed for the trial from the Centers for Disease Control have not been released due to privacy laws protecting medical service providers and health insurers.” It is the same Bad Faith cover-up, stonewalling mumbo-jumbo excuses routinely dispensed by the AMA (American Medical Association). These medical associations absolutely refuse to cooperate with patient efforts to research and assess the competency, skills, integrity and complaint history of its doctors. And these medical associations absolutely refuse to purge their ranks of known bad, incompetent physicians. If they WOULD purge their ranks, the malpractice insurance coverage for good, responsible doctors would be radically reduced.

    First off, reusing a medical instrument inserted into the rectal cavity, in violation of all medical protocols and procedures, is NOT negligence, it is “Depraved Heart Callously Reckless Indifference” driven by sociopathic penny-pinching greed. Most malpractice is traceable to such conduct (irresponsible cost cutting that shifts unreasonable risk to patient without telling them). Secondly, the target of Tort Reformers is “non-economic damage” awards which, contrary to reformers, are REAL DAMAGES. Consider a 30 year old Harvard Medical School graduate who has a family of five and a highly successful brain surgery practice, and his eye doctor ‘negligently’ puts battery acid in both his eyes, instead of boric acid (something as inherently stupid and negligent as reusing a colonoscopy syringe). How much is that surgeon’s “total loss of eyesight” worth? Considering the fact this surgeon had his whole life and career in front of him, and considering how inexcusably stupid, negligent and irresponsible the error was. But Nevada’s Tort Reform law says this victim’s eyesight is only worth $350,000 at most. YOU’VE GOT TO BE JOKING. All because the most powerful, wealthiest lobby on Earth, the Insurance Industry, wants higher profits. Why isn’t anyone asking, “Why is there so much negligence?” After all, litigation stops dead in its tracks when there’s no negligence.

    In response to the statement, “litigation stops dead in its tracks when there’s no negligence” most tort reformers argue, out of desperation, that frivolous cases with no merit would NOT be stopped even if there was no negligence and they claim the filing of frivolous lawsuits is such a serious problem that it accounts for most of the skyrocketing health care costs we see. The first way that even a novice observer knows this is false, comes by way of Tort Reform legislation itself. No Tort Reform legislation in this country addresses this point or even seeks to change anything in this regard, because it is NOT deemed to be a significant problem. You simply don’t win cases if there is no negligence, and even though reformers can’t figure that out, fortunately, juries CAN. Attorneys and plaintiffs are held liable for all costs and legal fees if a suit is “unfounded” or frivolous. In fact, even if they win, they can be held liable for all costs and legal fees if the award is close to an earlier defense settlement offer. Attorneys can be and are disbarred and\or heavily fined for filing “unfounded” lawsuits. And Attorneys and plaintiffs can be sued for vexatious litigation. The system has plenty of deterrents against frivolous lawsuits and they all work very effectively. Furthermore, because attorneys invariably take these cases on a “Contingency Fee” basis, they avoid weak or frivolous cases like the plague, because they get nothing if they lose. So the claim of frivolous lawsuits is a phony, redherring issue, designed to distract observers from the ‘real’ issue. And that REAL issue is, “If malpractice lawsuit payouts is the leading cause of skyrocketing health care costs as reformers claim, then — WHY IS THERE SO MUCH NEGLIGENCE? Why are there so many negligent, irresponsible doctors?

    A final point needs to be made about malpractice ‘litigation’ and how it is already severely tilted AGAINST the Plaintiff (victim). There is profound ignorance (and error) in the public’s understanding of malpractice litigation. It graphically illustrates the nature of the health care problem. At trial an attorney is NOT permitted to tell the jury that any awards they grant will NOT cover the victim’s legal fees (invariably 40%). The attorney can NOT tell the jury to remember to include or add on the victim’s legal fees to the health care costs. Not realizing that legal fees need to be added, the jury Invariably, looks at just the ‘actual’ medical expenses past-present-future and awards that amount only. If the plaintiff attorney tries to tell the jury to add the legal fees to the medical costs, a mistrial would be declared and the attorney would be punished and possibly disbarred. So the jury awards the plaintiff his ‘actual’ past-present-future medical expenses of $100,000, erroneously believing all medical costs will be covered. The lawyer takes $40,000 and the victim has a remaining $40,000 medical bill that he can’t pay. Because he can’t pay the medical bill he can’t receive any further medical care. Too many uninformed and misinformed so-called “reformers” are blowing misinformation out their tailpipes with no regard for the truth of the matter. The legal system is already heavily lopsided AGAINST the Plaintiff (victim). The bottom line, Tort Reform is a Trojan Horse With Bad Intentions. If you wait till your ox is being gored, you’ll find out the hard way. When people have their facts right, they invaribly oppose Tort Reform from the outset.

    To truly understand the REAL causes of skyrocketing runaway inflation in the medical field, one must examine the very nature and character of the medical profession. We know that where competition is strong and rigorous, this ‘competition,’ in and of itself, is highly effective in keeping costs low and within the reach of most consumers. The axiom in economic capitalism is: “Acute, strenuous ‘competition’ is good for the consumer and is essential to a healthy economy.” Conversely, another axiom embedded in capitalism holds that: “Where ‘competition’ is stifled or eliminated, the consequences are bad for the consumer and unhealthy for the economy. These are enduring axioms (truisms) that have long been recognized as forming the bedrock of a healthy, free and open structure of capitalism.


    Upon examination, it becomes immediately and unmistakably clear that in the medical profession, most of the “competition” has been stifled or eliminated entirely. Patent Laws are statutory devices intentionally designed to completely eliminate competition (Patent = Gov’t Granted Monopoly) for very long periods of time, ostensibly for the purpose of allowing inventors to recover the costs and expenses they incurred during the research and development of the patented invention. Nearly all of the equipment and technology in the medical profession is patent protected and is not subject to any competition whatsoever. As a result, medical facilities are paying outrageously HIGH prices for equipment and technology that is certain to become obsolete very quickly. This problem is immensely compounded by the fact that nearly all of the equipment and technology in the medical profession is changing so rapidly and so constantly, that the medical profession rarely, if ever, reaches a point where the patents have finally expired for the equipment and technology routinely used in providing medical services. Thus, without competition, the cost of this vital, life-saving equipment and technology has spiraled out of control at such a ridiculous, monumental rate, that it can only be described as “Extortion” … where the patient has a gun at his head … pay top dollar or forsake critical life-saving medical treatment. Consequently, doctors are frequently heard complaining about the outrageously HIGH, crippling “overhead” that doctors invaribly have. The overhead is many, many times larger and more onerous than more malpractice insurance.

    It’s yet another recipe for a “Perfect Storm” of skyrocketing prices in an unrelenting price-gouging rampage. The consumer-patient in this scenario is what is commonly called “a captive consumer,” meaning in most instances, the consumer-patient-victim canNOT “Opt-out” … canNOT decline the medical service and is NOT free to “leave” and shop elsewhere, where the medical service is indispensible to their health and survival, which is invaribly the circumstance. Shopping for a better price is a ludicrous notion, because there is absolutely NO “price competition” in the medical field, as everyone well-knows. It’s the perfect environment … the perfect “set-up” for an Extortion Racket. And that is exactly what we are seeing over and over again in the immensely lucrative Medical Industry.

    But this has only described the economic situation at the manufacturing level. Next we must look at the Health Care Provider level, where typically doctors and other investment entrepreneurs pool their resources together to purchase this enormously expensive state-of-the-art medical equipment and technology. These investors have calculated that their investment represents an extremely lucrative business opportunity, and this adds significantly to the formidable costs passed on to the patient, on top of the outrageous cost passed on by the manufacturer-patent-holder. Next we have to look at the operators of this enormously expensive state-of-the-art medical equipment and technology. The complexity of this technology requires extensive “specialized” education and training of the facility’s personnel — the operators. As consumers well-know, whenever one hears the term “specialized” one immediately knows that we are NOT talking about something that is INEXPENSIVE.

    This problem is compounded many times over again in the medical field, by the Pharmaceutical Industry, a vital component of medical services, where the vast majority of its products are “Patent Protected” and therefore NOT subject to the intensive competition necessary to keep costs down. And once again, the science and technology in the Pharmaceutical Industry is changing so rapidly and so constantly, that the medical profession rarely ever reaches a point where the patents have finally expired for the drug and the technology routinely used in providing medical services. Furthermore, whenever the patent comes close to expiring, the Pharmaceutical Industry coaxes Congress into “extending” the patent protection period and Congress (and agencies) dutifully comply with the request, to the patients’ detriment (always). Additionally, given the fact there has been a doctor shortage for a very long time in this country, one cannot, with a straight face, contend that there is any significant health care “pricing” competition or “price wars” among care givers. One never sees health care provider advertisements proclaiming “We are the cheapest in town” or “Super Savings Discount.” And so it goes. Layer upon layer of investment opportunists piling-on and further hiking the costs ever higher, secure in the knowledge that the consumer-patient at the end of the line has NO options when the technology is crucial to the treatment they need for health and survival. It’s a recipe for extortion. It contains all of the ripe conditions necessary for a “Perfect Storm” patient-consumer-victim price-gouging rampage, just like we have been seeing for the past 2-3 decades.

    Every American knows, with certainty, that whenever competition is stifled or eliminated, it is a GUARANTEED recipe for absurdly high, exorbitant, outrageous “artificially concocted” runaway inflation in costs which often puts the product or service beyond the reach of most consumers. There are many examples of this ‘absence of competition’ in our everyday lives and in each and every case, that ‘elimination of competition’ has resulted in a horrific, unjustifiable onslaught of never-ending skyrocketing costs and prices (Utilities, Gas & Oil, Insurance, Pharmaceuticals, Microsoft, and patent-protected state-of-the-art technologies)


    And we have only scratched the surface of the true leading, primary causes for the skyrocketing, runaway inflation in the medical profession. The Insurance Industry has played a major role in directly causing the skyrocketing, runaway inflation we are seeing in the medical profession (no coincidence that rampant skyrocketing, runaway inflation has long been the hallmark of the Insurance Industry). The entire issue of Tort Reform came into being because doctors had long complained, in vain, about the outrageous, unwarranted and never-ending escalation in their malpractice insurance premiums. The Insurance Industry blamed ‘litigation’ but refused to open their books so independent examiners could determine if the claim had any merit. All doctors in this country MUST have Malpractice Insurance before they can practice medicine in this country. This sets up yet another “Extortion Racket” in the Insurance Industry. Over and over again doctors have complained, ad nauseam, that their Malpractice Insurance premiums doubled or tripled or quadrupled for no identifiable reason, even though they have never been accused of any wrongful conduct. This is clear, unmistakable evidence that the Insurance Industry is taking enormous, unfair advantage of their pivotal position in providing the legally required insurance coverage.

    The insurance concept, like the bank-lending concept, was designed to spread the costs of “risk” according to the level of ‘risk’ which the insured (or borrower) represents. Thus, someone who has been driving for 35 years without ever having a traffic offense or an accident (low risk), should be paying much lower auto liability insurance premiums than someone who, for example, has had ten accidents and four DWI convictions in the past ten years (high risk). When you see unjustifiable, unwarranted huge premium escalation for someone who is known to be a low risk, you know immediately and unmistakably that the insurer is “extorting” those premiums solely because they know the physician (the Insured) MUST have that insurance coverage to practice medicine. When government bestows this kind of enormous “leverage” on the Insurance Industry it is a GUARANTEED recipe for extortionary pricing practices and spiraling, out-of-control exorbitant premium price-fixing with non-stop inflationary pricing. The immensely powerful Insurance Industry has managed, at each turn, to control the legislation (and the legislators) and defeat proposals which would have eliminated this intractable, profoundly lucrative practice.

    Once the TRUE leading, primary causes of these skyrocketing medical costs is revealed, it becomes painfully obvious why Tort Reform Legislation has totally failed to provide any significant identifiable RELIEF from the problems complained of, namely, the unrelenting astronomical upward spiral in the costs of medical care and medical services in this country. It is worth noting that the primary Tort Reform advocates are the Insurance Industry, the Pharmaceutical Industry and the AMA, i.e., the primary culprits, beneficiaries and causal agents in the unrelenting problem of skyrocketing medical costs. It is also worth noting that these three, individually, constitute the most powerful “lobbyists” in the United States, infinitely more powerful, in cash and influence, than any lawyer lobby group. And they have been enormously successful in influencing legislation and legislators who are shopping for a large dependable political and financial support base to bolster their political influence, power and their “re-electability.”


    Tort Reform Legislation hurts every patient and is extremely dangerous, not only because it fails to squarely address the TRUE causes of the problem, but especially because it removes the only patient protection there was to deter incompetence and the mal-practice conduct of medical providers in this country. The single-most important function of malpractice law in the U. S. has been to serve as a deterrent against outrageous, irresponsible medical conduct. Offenders were supposed to be carrying the financial burden of their misconduct. Repeat offenders were supposed to be carrying a much heavier financial burden for their misconduct or they were supposed to be expunged from the practice of medicine completely.

    Instead, what we now have in this country is an AMA that protects, shields and conceals incidents of malpractice; an Insurance Industry that has been granted a licence to extort outrageous unjustifiable price-gouging premiums with impunity; and a Patent Law system that perpetuates runaway skyrocketing inflation by effectively and completely eliminating the competition. Patients (via medical facilities) aren’t just paying “Top Dollar” for every single medical product and service, THEY’RE PAYING AN OUTRAGIOUS, EXORBITANTLY HIGH PRICE, a price so outrageously high that one ordinarily only sees such extreme price levels in “Extortion Schemes” and mob racketeering scenarios.

    See, “Hospital Accused Of Putting Patients At Risk To Cut Costs” (–ABC Wisconsin News Report–). This story serves as a recent graphic example of how the medical profession and hospitals like this one (Wisconsin Columbia St. Mary’s Hospital) go to extreme lengths in order to stonewall the public’s efforts to get full disclosure of hospital records about infection problems within hospitals. In fact, as this article illustrates, the medical profession has “lawyered-up” heavily and enlisted it’s powerful lobbyists in order to defeat federal legislation that would have “required” hospitals to maintain and report ALL incidents of hospital-born infections, including the super bug MRSA. The medical profession does not want the reporting requirements because it does not want to disclose “the truth” to the public about serious hospital problems which every public citizen is entitled to know BEFORE entrusting such institutions with their medical care. This article discloses the concerted, militant and obstinant determination of the medical profession to conceal incidents of malpractice and protect the offenders responsible. And that makes “lawsuits” the most reliable and effective means of getting “full disclosure” from the medical profession and of holding the medical profession accountable for irresponsible conduct. The medical profession’s iron-fisted non-disclosure policies also make “lawsuits” the most effective and necessary deterent there is for coercing the medical profession to act responsibly, by holding it responsible (and liable) when it fails to do so. As this article clearly illustrates, the medical profession would rather stonewall and conceal the Truth while protecting irresponsible incompetents so the bad practices can continue, than honestly disclose problems, terminate those responsible and correct unsafe, dangerous and irresponsible conduct. The medical profession vehemently opposes full disclosure and deterrent reporting requirements because then it can NOT continue its irresponsible malpractice policies “with impunity” and without dire consequences.


    Tort Reform Legislation is extremely dangerous in the medical field because it puts extremely low limits on the total amount of damages a patient-victim can receive in litigation, even when the malpractice conduct is so reprehensible and outrageous and extreme, that no competent physician in the World would ever have engaged in such a practice. By putting extremely low limits on the total amount of damages a patient-victim can receive in litigation, Tort Reform Legislation has the direct intentional effect of making “worst case scenario” damage awards LOW and PREDICTABLE for insurance companies and for offenders who commit malpractice. Let’s take a look at the “consequences” of making damage awards PREDICTABLE and LOW.


    The criminal prosecution of Ford in the Ford Pinto case unmistakably demonstrates the dire adverse “consequences” of making damage awards PREDICTABLE and LOW. In the Ford Pinto criminal case is was established at trial that the vehicle was susceptible to a horrific, catastrophic explosion from even a low-speed (5-10 MPH) rear-end impact. Such an impact pushed the seam of the gas tank into the differential bolt, causing the seam to split, throwing gallons of gasoline into the passenger compartment and invariably resulting in the horrendous and gruesome loss of life from the resulting fiery explosion. Many lives were lost and severely damaged from just such accidents. Even a minor rear-end fender-bender was capable of causing this horrendous explosion.

    During the prosecution, it was also disclosed that Ford was fully aware of this defect and its potential prior to putting the vehicle on the market. Furthermore, it was disclosed that Ford executives sent correspondence to its cost engineers and design engineers asking them to investigate the problem and determine whether it would be cheaper to correct the defect and avoid lawsuits, or whether it would be cheaper to ignore the defect and take their chances with the inevitable stream of lawsuits that would follow.


    The conclusion of Ford’s design and cost engineers was that it would cost about $7.46 per vehicle to correct the defect and make the vehicle safe. They further stated that, based on their calculations, it would be cheaper for Ford to simply take their chances with the inevitable lawsuits, rather than expend the $7.46 per vehicle to make it safe. And that is exactly what Ford did. They did NOT correct the known fatal defect, electing instead, to take their chances with the inevitable lawsuits resulting from the horrific deaths and injuries caused by this known defect (maybe they were immensely confident that their comrades in the Legislature would shield them from responsibility via Tort Reform legislation). For this reason Ford was criminally prosecuted.

    Many innocent lives were lost and destroyed as a result of the incomprehensibly horrific fiery explosions that were the direct result of this well-known vehicle defect.

    This gruesome example vividly illustrates two crucial points. It shows, with unmistakable clarity, exactly WHY offenders and their insurers want lower, more predictable ceilings on the damage awards a victim can receive. And it also graphically illustrates exactly WHY low, predictable damage award ceilings are profoundly dangerous and immensely adverse to the interests of the general public. With low, predictable damage award ceilings, cost and design engineers will nearly ALWAYS determine that it is cheaper for them to take their chances with inevitable lawsuits than to make their product safe. It’s just loading the dice in their favor before they “take their chances” with inevitable lawsuits. It stands as a compelling incentive for offenders to embed ‘defects’ into the product for greater profitability. With Tort Reform Legislation, cost and design engineers will nearly ALWAYS determine that it is “preferable” for them to unjustifiably put YOUR life and health in grave danger and at great risk, for no other reason than to increase profitability. And that is precisely what we see happening. Offenders are building “defects” into the cost and design of products, because they are no longer significantly liable for any dire consequences.

    When there is NO ceiling on the possibile money award an injured or wrongful death plaintiff-victim could receive from the offender, the potential payout canNOT be reliably calculated or estimated by insurance companies and offenders in advance. The offender and insurance companies canNOT assume it will be a low, nominal amount. When there IS a guaranteed LOW ceiling on the possibile money award an injured or wrongful death plaintiff-victim could receive from the offender, the potential payout CAN easily and readily be reliably calculated or estimated by insurance companies and offenders in advance. Once insurance companies and offenders know in advance that the consequences of their unlawful, grotequely unconscionable conduct is GUARANTEED to be “Nominal” at worst, all incentives for them to act lawfully, responsibly and conscionably are obliterated. This has been well-known by law enforcement and judges in the criminal justice system for centuries. The more severe the “consequences” — the more effective the deterrent. If a speeding ticket would only cost the offender a nickel fine, everyone would be speeding whenever they felt like it. It was the “uncertainty” about the potential “size” of the malpractice award amount that was the actual “deterrent” against unscrupulous conduct by prospective offenders. Tort Reform removes this deterrent … intentionally. With catastrophic consequences for the many patient-victims.

    Stated simply and succinctly, Tort Reform Legislation creates low, predictable damage award ceilings, which has the direct immediate effect of removing the incentives that there once were to motivate the industry to act responsibly and conscionably in designing products and services that are safe. In effect, Tort Reform Legislation creates an enormous INCENTIVE for industry to act IRRESPONSIBLY and UNCONSCIONABLY . . . because it allows them to do so with complete legal and financial immunity, and for no other reason than to serve the mundane objective to increase profitability.



    When one considers all of the undeniable, formidable adverse factors and conditions intractably embedded in the Medical Industry it becomes unmistakably clear that “litigation” of malpractice incidents is NOT a “primary” or “leading” cause of skyrocketing prices in health care. It is facially obvious that “litigation” of malpractice incidents is NOT even a “significant” or “discernable” factor in the problem. The TRUE significant factors are invariably traceable to the most powerful lobby groups in the World and their militant determination to protect and preserve the enormous, outrageously lucrative profit-taking system they have enjoyed in the Health Care Industry for many decades. It is these mammoth, influential profiteering lobby interests that have virulently persisted in causing health care costs in this country to spiral out of control. “Out of control” because consumers-patients have been unable to weaken the immense political power and influence of these mammoth profiteering lobby institutions. “Out of control” because our governments and legislators have consistently refused to temper or diffuse the power and influence these enormous lobby institutions have exerted to rape, pillage and plunder the lucrative Health Care Industry and its patients and the government via Medicare and Medicaid.

    Make no mistake about how profoundly dangerous this Tort Reform legislation really is. Whenever you hear in the news that legislators are contemplating Tort Reform Legislation, make sure that you take the time to voice your vociferous, staunch disapproval of any proposals that fail to address the TRUE primary causes of the problem. Make sure that you take the time to vociferously express your staunch disapproval of any proposals that seek to erroneously blame litigation and malpractice “victims” for the spiraling costs of medical services. Make sure that you take the time to vociferously express your staunch disapproval of any proposals that seek to limit malpractice award amounts (lower ceilings) for malpractice “victims.” And be sure to tell them WHY. The life, health and safety for YOU and your loved-ones may hang in the balance.    (Must-read Articles on this Topic, “BP Memo Puts Price Tag on Lives –CNN Report–” and “The Malevolent Effort to De-regulate Everything – Removal of Gov’t Safeguards“).


    The Reflecting Pool Discourse Blog