CONRAD MURRAY, M.D. DEFENDANT: WHATAYATHINK???

@Ragman,

David wrote:

Mercy

Ragman wrote:

Justice

If u r ever tried for a crime,
I hope that in the name of mercy & justice:
u will have less emotional stress than has been inflicted upon the defendant.

David

1 Reply

@OmSigDAVID,

I feel no concern for this man. the timeframe is of no concern. He 'only' has to wait until the first of next week. MJ is dead and his family and his surviving beneficiaries deserve the appropriate legal timeframe. I see nothing wrong or torturous here. A rush for some 'justice' serves no one.

1 Reply

@Ragman,

Michael Jackson was an adult and is responsible for his own actions. The doctor was doing what Michael Jackson wanted and if he didn't he would have been fired and replaced like so many doctors before him.

This doctor was Michael Jackson's employee doing what his employer demanded.

1 Reply

@maxdancona,

Wrong and assumptive. Who knows what sort of mental capacity MJ had at the time he ordered whatever he ordered.

It is an assumption that the doctor would have been fired. It is likewise irrelevant. If he was fired, then so be it...but it would have not been HIM that allowed harm to have occured. He broke his oath..as he either allowed harm or did harm directly.

It is likewise an assumption that MJ wanted to die.

2 Replies

@Ragman,

DAVID wrote:

That 's what MJ wanted.
This is the Land of the Free and the Home of the Brave.
MJ was brave enuf to take those drugs.

Ragman wrote:

how do you know what MJ wanted?

Does ANYONE dispute that he wanted Propofol??? I think not.

Ragman wrote:

How do you know what sort of decision MJ was capable of - or even if capable of AFA making a rational decision?

HE is the captain of his own ship; HE, in his autonomy as a free American, had to decide what is rational,
with as much freedom as we have when we decide for whom to vote; (i.e., infinite freedom).

Ragman wrote:

He certainly wanted to sleep. Doubtful that he wanted to die.

Agreed.

Ragman wrote:

That medical professional who was in charge of his patient should have made the correct decision.

NO; not in a free country.
It was his life, his body, his choice, not that of any government. (Please note scorn toward government.)

Ragman wrote:

Had he done so and monitored him 100% , then it's likely MJ would not have died that day.
MJ did not have to be euthanized (due to having some deadly or hopeless illness) with or without his (the MD) knowledge.

MJ chose to take his chances. The knowledge was his.

0 Replies

@Ragman,

Ragman wrote:

I feel no concern for this man. the timeframe is of no concern. He 'only' has to wait until the first of next week. MJ is dead and his family and his surviving beneficiaries deserve the appropriate legal timeframe. I see nothing wrong or torturous here. A rush for some 'justice' serves no one.

I 'd treat U with better mercy, in the same circumstance.

0 Replies

@Ragman,

Ragman wrote:

Wrong and assumptive. Who knows what sort of mental capacity MJ had at the time he ordered whatever he ordered.

It is an assumption that the doctor would have been fired. It is likewise irrelevant. If he was fired, then so be it...but it would have not been HIM that allowed harm to have occured.

I take exception to the implication that MJ was not already going thru the tortures of the damned. The doctor shoud have helped with that.
I stand up for that principle both as a libertarian and as a hedonist.

David

1 Reply

@OmSigDAVID,

Hedonism implies some joy might have been a goal. I seriously doubt that. As I understand it, hedonists believe that "pleasure is the only intrinsic good. In very simple terms, a hedonist strives to maximize net pleasure." It appears that he sought the meds for sleep-rest so that he could be productive on his tour. This is not about hedonism..so why jump on that bandwagon?

This is not about granting some euthanistic desire. He may have been tortured and damned but that is hardly relevant. He wanted sleep. As for his mental state, that is territory perhaps of a psychiatrist treatment.

This Doctor, by his training, knew the SERIOUS risk of that drug..and his job was to ... at the risk of repetition, once again, I point back to the Hippocratic oath...First..do no HARM!

I respectfully disagree and bow out. Wishing you a good day.

1 Reply

@Ragman,

That's an assumption on your part. What makes you think that this doctor took the Hippocratic oath?

2 Replies

@maxdancona,

Seeing you are raising an issue of something not in evidence anywhere...or from any news reports of the trial, are you aware that he HAS NOT?

1 Reply

@Ragman,

I am just poking gentle fun at your "assumption" thing.

1 Reply

@maxdancona,

sorry but couldn't see tongue nor cheek.

"Generalissimo Franco is still dead!"

0 Replies

@OmSigDAVID,

What exactly are you disagreeing with? This is not about Michael Jackson. It's about the behaviour, professional and otherwise, of the DOCTOR. MJ's wants and needs are not part of this debate. The debate is whether he is guilty of involuntary manslaughter by virtue of his PERFORMANCE. Remove MJ from the picture altogether and what do you have? A greedy, unethical doctor, that's what. Doesn't matter who the patient was, as long as it paid enough, that guy would have done what he did.

3 Replies

@OmSigDAVID,

OmSigDAVID wrote:

Morally, everyone has the right to end his life when he chooses
and he has the right to indulge in risky behavior.
Each man is the captain of his own ship.

Morally maybe he is, but again, this isn't about him. Morally, the doctor was wrong.

1 Reply

@Mame,

Quote:

This is not about Michael Jackson

Sure it is....partly.

0 Replies

@Mame,

That's not logical Mame. Michael Jackson is an integral part of the story. Without a crazy self-destructive super rich patient demanding drugs from the doctors in his employ there would be no story.

Being greedy is not a crime even for a doctor. Being unethical should get your license taken away.

But come on. This story is about Michael Jackson. If Michael Jackson hadn't died because of the drugs he demanded this doctor wouldn't be on trial.

And what if you remove this doctor from the picture altogether? It is quite likely that Michael Jackson would have found another way or another doctor to act on his self-destructive wishes.

0 Replies

Just to be clear, I am arguing for a reasoned moderate response. I agree that the doctor acted unethically and should be censured for that.

Given the extreme self-destructive behavior of this patient, I feel it is unjust to nail this doctor to the wall for granting the wishes of his employer.

1 Reply

@maxdancona,

So...ethics be damned, huh? Oath be damned? He should not be at the whim of the wishes of his employer. There is guidance that over-rides such a scenario.

Any and all dotors that dispense drugs in such a way to endanger the lives of the patients should also and would also be censured. The oath is what should guide their behavior or we are all at risk for such prostitution.

No, he didn't kill MJ but given that he had access to him and was there on the job, he didn't prevent his harming himself either.

1 Reply

@Ragman,

Quote:

Any and all dotors that dispense drugs in such a way to endanger the lives of the patients should also and would also be censured. The oath is what should guide their behavior or we are all at risk for such prostitution.

No, he didn't kill MJ but given that he had access to him and was there on the job, he didn't prevent his harming himself either.

I agree with this. What are we arguing about again?

1 Reply

@maxdancona,

Whether or not he should have left the Jackson 5. Drunk

Oh yes, and they should fine Michael Jackson, too. Definitely remove his driver's license.

1 Reply

CONRAD MURRAY, M.D. DEFENDANT: WHATAYATHINK???

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know