You know, people can be prosecuted for violations to medical ethics. For example:

A physician shall be dedicated to providing competent medical care, with compassion and respect for human dignity and rights.

A physician shall uphold the standards of professionalism, be honest in all professional interactions, and strive to report physicians deficient in character or competence, or engaging in fraud or deception, to appropriate entities.

A physician shall respect the law and also recognize a responsibility to seek changes in those requirements which are contrary to the best interests of the patient.

A physician shall respect the rights of patients, colleagues, and other health professionals, and shall safeguard patient confidences and privacy within the constraints of the law.

A physician shall continue to study, apply, and advance scientific knowledge, maintain a commitment to medical education, make relevant information available to patients, colleagues, and the public, obtain consultation, and use the talents of other health professionals when indicated.

A physician shall, in the provision of appropriate patient care, except in emergencies, be free to choose whom to serve, with whom to associate, and the environment in which to provide medical care.

A physician shall recognize a responsibility to participate in activities contributing to the improvement of the community and the betterment of public health.

A physician shall, while caring for a patient, regard responsibility to the patient as paramount.

A physician shall support access to medical care for all people.

A couple years... though she did look rather well preserved for her age...

Yeah... could we just stop that line of inquiry before we get into any weird, pseudo-Oedipal issues?

(ignoring the milf talk)

that'll teach me to hit the quote button...

To late.

Any way to "help" them out?

Call them up?

Ron Caliburn wrote:Sounds like the FDA should look into Robin's father . . . the legit wing of the FDA that is.

that would probably be a better idea if he weren't working for the illegitimate branch.

I was really hoping somebody would connect the dots with him running the Home and the goons coming from there.

Then again, I didn't even fill in all the dots...

Ron Caliburn wrote:Do you have anything more about the illegitmate wing?

well, I know where they train some of their agents, for starters...

always thought it was odd that the Home had "conflict resolution" instead of "anger management"... and then there was that whole "positive power" group...

I never actually took part in any of this, of course, because my dad paying for me being there made me "private insurance" instead of government funded.

Must have been a long day. I had to read that 3 times.
And I am still a little iffy.

Hey little birdie, lets play 20 questions.

1. they taught more the image of empathy than actual undesranding at "conflict management" eh?

2. "positve power" was more about making sure that people saw you in a positive light than any actual positive behavior?

3. One of the things they were really big on is unquestioning obedience?

That is all I have till I have the answers to those questions which will undoubtabley lead to more questions.


As for my interest, let us just say I may have worked with people from a similar place while I was with some alpabet soup departments a few years back.

Oh and while I was an operative, we would often use agencies other than our own when talking with civilians, most don't pay attention wo what the initials stand for, or ask questions if it is a benign department. (I prefered the ATF, myself - asking for "assistance with an ongoing investigation" or to warn people of the legal penalties of "interfereing with a government investigation".


On the good side, little birdy, no matter what they claim an operative cannot get away with violating your constitutional rights.

On the bad side, your rights to some operatives only exist if there is proof of your having contact with them. I would reccomend asking a congressman, or a friendly Law Enforcement officer start an investigation - paper trails tend to keep people from dissapearing, as well as official publicity completely changeing the rules of engagement, you blow the whistle, keep people around while the ball gets rolling, and then they step back and put the kid gloves back on, that's kind of how jonestown happened, a congressman got involved, and we had to put the kid gloves back on rather than just dropping the bastard.

Thomas Sheldon wrote:Hey little birdie, lets play 20 questions.

1. they taught more the image of empathy than actual undesranding at "conflict management" eh?

2. "positve power" was more about making sure that people saw you in a positive light than any actual positive behavior?

3. One of the things they were really big on is unquestioning obedience?

That is all I have till I have the answers to those questions which will undoubtabley lead to more questions.

first off: wow, you've managed to find a nickname I like less than Timmy.

well, again, I never took part in the groups since I was "private insurance", but conflict resolution was apparently more about resolution through force... you beat the other guy, conflict resolved. at least, this is what Chuck told me after the proper application of a rat and some hot coals. and those kids never seemed to get any less angry, no matter how many groups they went to.

I can definitely vouch for unquestioning obedience though... "Everyone showers at night!" "but, sir, I sweat at night... it makes more sense for hygenic purposes if I get up earlier and shower in the morning" "YOU SHOWER AT NIGHT NOW SON!"

Sasha wrote:Write your congressmen!

It's the American way.

Sorry I don't have a big enough bank account to get their attention.

Just make sure they think it's about them.

Rock the Vote. Hehe.

I have some rocks, let's go!

Party on.