Posted on 08/13/2004 9:22:10 PM PDT by Unknown Freeper
On the other hand, put yourself in the position of the people who have to make these decisions.
Just look at the flack they've received due to the approval of certain weight loss drugs.
In fact, there are even some people urging the FDA to impose stricter restraints, especially in the cases of these "herbal" remedies and other, largely unregulated, drugs.
My only point is that this issue isn't quite as simplistic as the bumper sticker slogan: "THE FDA IS BAD!"
While I've been a frequent critic of some of the delays that have been imposed upon drug manufacturers, I don't think that the FDA is solely responsible for this problem.
The litigiousness of certain people also has to be taken into account.
Agree. . . and the 'how' re she got that way. . .Thalidomide or 'other'; has nothing to do with her lawsuit either.
Interesting no other details are provided in this story; like 'how she got there'. . .or how she actually manages 'in the world'. . .
I used to see a woman, in a chair; with the straw thing you blew in to make chair go. Have to say; she 'went' everywhere; just watching her in traffic; was enough to bring on pre-heart attack breathing.
Think those that 'watched' her; were more at risk than she was.
Although, I have not seen her for some time now. . .
What do you call a limbless woman who isn't allowed on an airplane?
Sue.
"We've got three feet for your two legs!"
Well we have got some really stupid people here today… first let me say as an amputee (just one arm thought.) Just because your too damm stupid to figurer out how to get about with out your limb(s)
Does not mean I or other are too your too damm stupid to figurer out how to get about with out our limb(s) particularly when these people have been doing it there whole lives
First the story does not state she ask the airline for any help or special accommodation … if she did the airline could decline to let her fly on the grounds that they didn’t have the extra help or special accommodation
But if didn’t ask and/or need any …
Note: it does not say if she had and aid with her or wore prosthetics or if she still had partial limbs (Common in Thalidomide I.E. the “flipper limbs”) because that is a big difference for abilities
But as some one who spent many hours at UCLA medical center prosthetics dept. as a kid where I was used as a "training model" for the prosthetics techs(I’m a very difficult prosthetics fit as I’m a very short “BE”…2in. below elbow… but I don’t wear one an I don’t need it)…. I seen just about ever variation on “limblessness” and quite frankly where there a will there a way… and if someone was that way at birth or young when it happen… you adapt to the point it becomes a not issue
PS… Several British WW2 fighter pilot fought in combat as amputee (with prosthetics) several were missing an arm and one (who was a Squadron leader and top ace) missing both legs (he had lost his legs prewar )
Bottom line... If they didn't ask for you help and didn't need there help and the airline just absolutely (u)assumed(/u) there needed there help...then...
Limit lawsuits to the actual damage + a maximum punative damage.
Nothing like being cultured and sensitive.
Way to go FROG airline.
Hope the lady cleans house or at least the company's bank account. Maybe John Dudwards will handle the litigation.
I'm that the children who were spared crippling birth defects didn't care about the methodology used to prevent the importation of thalidomide.]
Without trying to be picky; could you repeat that?
It has been noted here that this story is 'incomplete'. However, if you are wearing a prosthetic; I do not think you are considered or counted as simply 'limbless'.
If she arrived without them; as it 'appears' she did; and as so mentioned by observant airline employee per complaint;
. . . then it is a more than reasonable assumption that this woman was a 'lawsuit'; looking for a reason.
The ambulance-chasers and their clientele in the Democratic Party would have you believe that the tort reforms signed into law by George W. Bush-with the assistance of willing allies in Texas' largely Democratic state legislature-in 1995 were a disaster in every respect.
They want you to believe that the measures enacted in Texas inevitably led to a Hobbesian legal climate, where people who were the victims of medical malpractice were subject to the whims of uncaring magistrates, who forced them into accepting judgments that were detrimental to their personal well being.
However, the actual facts belie the horror stories peddled by the Bar and their willing accomplices/conspirators in the mass media and national Democratic Party.
If you want to know the truth behind these trailblazing legal reforms, all you need to do is take a cursory glance at a study of this issue conducted for "Citizens For A Sound Economy" by the Perry Group.
Bump!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.