PDA

View Full Version : Bulletproof Military Malpractice?


BEWD
01-31-2008, 04:53 PM
NEW YORK -- On the CBS EVENING NEWS WITH KATIE COURIC on Thursday, Jan. 31 (5:30 p.m. on KIRO 7) Correspondent Byron Pitts reports the story of Sgt. Carmelo Rodriquez, a 29-year-old U.S. Marine who served in Iraq and whose misdiagnosis by military doctors led directly to his death, of stage 4 melanoma. On Nov. 16, 2007, as Pitts was waiting outside his room to interview him, Rodriguez died. His family urged the CBS News crew to stay and tell the soldier's story, which was his wish.

Rodriguez enlisted in the Marines in 1997. His initial medical check-up indicated that he had melanoma, but the doctors never told the soldier and no one in the military followed up on that report.

Eight years later, while Rodriguez was serving in Iraq, the heightened and very visible symptoms were checked by a military doctor and diagnosed as a wart. Rodriguez was instructed to have someone look at it when he got back to the U.S. five months later.

The CBS News investigation unearthed a military memo that called Sgt. Rodriguez' case "a major screw-up." That doesn't change a cold, hard fact for the families of soldiers who have died as a result of medical malpractice by the military: a 1950 Supreme Court ruling that bars "active duty" military personnel or their families from suing the federal government for injuries incidental to their service. According a veterans group that track soldiers who are misdiagnosed, there are hundreds of similar cases across the country.

source: http://www.kirotv.com/news/15186088/detail.html

Didn't see a thread made for this, just saw this on the news(they just had a 20 minute special about this on my news station). Know it's a short article, but basically the geist of it(and the news special) is that if you're in the military(as a lot of mlitary srkers here most likely know, so this isn't news to them), you can't sue the gov't for any injuries incidental to your service, wtf?

Civilians can sue the gov't, but not the people in the service getting shot at? O_o, one of the major complaints here is the protection it gives military doctors who make epic fuckups like this that lead to someone's death, and the families being unable to retaliate with any form of litigation, which the special said is basically saying that once you sign that line, you are no longer a civilian in any sense of the word. =/, this is obviously not the only case like this, but I'm surprised this hasn't really raised much of a firestorm until now, as I've never even heard of the "Ferris Doctrine" that makes this possible.

Phoenix Wright
01-31-2008, 05:56 PM
source: http://www.kirotv.com/news/15186088/detail.html

Didn't see a thread made for this, just saw this on the news(they just had a 20 minute special about this on my news station). Know it's a short article, but basically the geist of it(and the news special) is that if you're in the military(as a lot of mlitary srkers here most likely know, so this isn't news to them), you can't sue the gov't for any injuries incidental to your service, wtf?

Civilians can sue the gov't, but not the people in the service getting shot at? O_o, one of the major complaints here is the protection it gives military doctors who make epic fuckups like this that lead to someone's death, and the families being unable to retaliate with any form of litigation, which the special said is basically saying that once you sign that line, you are no longer a civilian in any sense of the word. =/, this is obviously not the only case like this, but I'm surprised this hasn't really raised much of a firestorm until now, as I've never even heard of the "Ferris Doctrine" that makes this possible.

They should take this to the courts. The precedent set by the Supreme Court is simply bad precedent.

BEWD
01-31-2008, 06:01 PM
I 2nd that, and the family's trying to sue(and rightfully so). I was also told by my mom that they had interviewed the man right before he died(his body had deteriorated so much he looked very old and like he was literally falling apart, he looked nothing like the young man in his pictures), the man gave his life for the interview, dying an hour after the reporters left. This is some serious bullshit, As frivoulosly sue happy as a lot of people are who actually gets stuff taken to court, this shit should be at the top of the priority list, I mean, they didn't even give the guy a military funeral for fucks sake(his family had to pay to get it arranged). :tdown:

EDIT: A military law expert interviewed during the special said he gets calls about this doctrine every 2 months, treating it like no big deal as "they're just wasting their time" as he put it. Then he read the report, after his face turned several shades, he said "The law has got to change", so hopefully his reaction is reciprocated and action can be taken.

Lv.32 Z-Ism Rose
01-31-2008, 08:50 PM
Yeah, this should be prosectued and whatnot. I can see the government having some immunity. I mean, being a soldier ISN'T safe. The gov getting sued every other day because a soldier died in battle would be ridiculous. But...

...this wasn't battle. This was a CLEAR case of gross negligence. A civy doctor doing that in this day and age would be sued until his grandkids felt the pinch.

m00b
01-31-2008, 11:07 PM
I don't see how this has anything to do with his military service, and should justifiably be allowed to sue. If he somehow magically contracted melanoma as a direct result of something the military had him do, then it'd probably be a different story. That's just me and my .02 on how the law should be interpreted.

I'm in the military and not all of the doctors are horrible people. Just find the right doctor and get him as your PCM.

BEWD
01-31-2008, 11:11 PM
Well apparently just the fact that he was indeed enlisted at some point strips him of any right to sue. The big sore thumb her is that the doctor had actually diagnosed him with the beginnings of melanoma, but made no effort to treat him, nor even filed his report into the database where the doctor in iraq could even access the information. That's what allowed his condition to develop to the point it did, and the military has stopped any attemps made to contact this doctor.

jae hoon
02-01-2008, 06:45 AM
They cant take it to the court, it is written into the contract that you sign personally that you cant sue. It is your responsibility to read the contract and know this and if you still sign, it is all on you. Mind you it is bullshit but there is nothing they can do.

MaxVandalism315
02-01-2008, 02:44 PM
i also seen this on tv and it was pretty sad. that law that says u cant sue the gov't is bullshit and needs to be rewritten. i understand not being able to sue the gov't if u get messed up during the war but when its malpratice then u should be able too