Jump to content

TylerHastings

Members
  • Posts

    218
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    6

Posts posted by TylerHastings

  1. To the original poster:

    It seems as though you’re trying to foist your personal views on everyone in this thread. While you personally do not feel that pornography is suitable for viewing in the public library, apparently those who set the rules in said library do not agree.

    While I do agree that pornography should not be accessible on computers owned by a governmental agency, I don’t feel that we should be limiting computer access by the general public (such as at the public library).

    Just because an individual CAN access ‘adult images’ on the computers at the public library, most will not access them there, simply because of their personal views.

    Now addressing your link to the story about the fire chief: The only opinion I can offer has already been offered; you’re comparing apples to oranges. What he was doing is considered harassment, pure and simple. I offer this fact based on the legal definition of harassment which is stated above by Lone Star.

    Now, I call into play a little personal experience. My father was a Judge, who had a case regarding what one party felt was pornography because a man was taking pictures of a woman sunbathing in her own back yard. The woman, who was the subject of the pictures, attempted to sue the man for civil damages. The suit was dismissed due to the photographer’s attorney discovering that no legal definition had hereto been set forth, and there was no case law covering such a suit.

    Now, to let you know about these photos…

    The woman was topless, laying face down on a chaise lounge. The only thing visible was her bare back and her covered behind.

    A dictionary definition doesn't cut it legally. The courts have argued this repeatedly and they can't even agree how to define it. So as reputable a resource as are Misters Merriam and Webster may be what you cited is not a legally bound definition.

    Just because the Courts views it as lawful or something just. As citizens we can not disagree? Quoting that the USSC Ruled it; is irrelevant to the Court of Public Opinion. We are members of this unsanctioned Court. All of us have that voice; that opinion; it maybe not be mainstream but it is still an opinion. Our opinions stem from our values, our core beliefs, & our experiences. Many of you agree with the USSC; that porn (happy; it's has been lower cased) is a right of an individual to view in the Public Library. Some do not. Just because it's lawful doesn't necessarily mean it's right.

    While the Court of Public Opinion may have a different view that what the U.S. Supreme Court has, since it’s an unsanctioned court; as Lone Star said, it’s opinions are irrelevant and calling attention to them is a moot point.

    • Like 2
  2. Dust there is so much to say but right this minute I don't have time to type it all out. Between my two majors I have very little to actually peruse the forums like I used to. The one thing I do want to say is thank you for everything. I will post more after this evening because tonight my college is closing the national collegiate premier of The Phantom of the Opera. I love ya man ("not in the homo way, not that there is anything wrong with that") and take care.

  3. Cyn,

    I tried one of those 12 week things...and it didn't work they teach bare minimums. Anyway a college program may not give you a perfect shot. I have listened to these same conversations that you have and I still made the mistake of trying this accelerated program bit...now that I have seen the error of my ways I have to thank AK and a few other people whose usernames are escaping me right now. I am working on not just one but two degrees I am double majoring in Tech Theatre and Paramedicine.

    • Like 1
  4. I don't want to threadjack here crotchity but...If we are going to report consensual sex between two minors are we going to report consensual sex between a minor and a adult....for example in CA if one half is 18 and the other half is 17 then the 18 y/o is guilty of statutory rape...even though it was consensual....is it truly a crime if both parties are within a reasonable age of each other?

  5. So after much hashing out of this call in the chat room...I would if I were an ALS provider get a written order from the doc ordering the transport...advise patient and family of all negative outcomes up to and including death. I would load the patient while providing stabilizing care and get on the horn with the receiving hospital as soon as possible asking the MICN to keep a doc available for consultation as needed. Then i would start to pray this guy didn't die.

    I need to add a couple of things to this post...Thanks Mobey Tcripp and Katie for hashing this out with me and helping me to better understand this also thanks for helping me start thinking outside of my BLS comfort zone and thinking as the ALS provider I will be in the future.

  6. But, we take verbal orders from docs all the time which are signed for by the nurse. So, to me it's all the same.

    As to your comment about the DNR, that is only good if he goes in to cardiac arrest or respiratory arrest, to which he has done neither at this time.

    I absolutely agree with your comment about setting the patient up for worst case scenario. Transport while stabilizing and if he crashes, then you have the DNR as your next coure of action.

    For us doing something like transporting an unstable patient 2 hrs away under my protocols would require a written order and in some cases this one I am not so sure about but some cases it would require a CCT unit.

    I suppose if the DNR is a simple Do Not Resuscitate or if it is a full on advanced directive.

  7. I would feel that unless I witnessed the verbal recension of the DNR that you should not provide life sustaining care in the patients current state. The way that I have always understood a DNR to work is that it is a legally binding document, the only way it could be rescinded is if another legal document revoking it was presented, the daughter had either medical or a durable power of attorney, or the patient states their wishes in front of you and another credible witness (eg. your partner, or the doctor). The patients daughter may very well concur with the plan however in absence of said power of attorney there is no legal power that the daughter wields.

    Now as far as the transport is concerned...as a BLS provider in my case I would refuse transport because I could not provide reasonable comfort measures based on the patients current needs. If I were an ALS provider I might consider the transfer to the "city" HOWEVER I would have the family be prepared for the worst case scenario and understand that the patient may not make it through the transfer.

    As far as the nurses statement "Dr. says he would like you to stabalize him and get him to the city ASAP.", I would not do any such thing with out a WRITTEN ORDER because as we all know if it is not written down it did not happen.

    • Like 1
×
×
  • Create New...