Posted on 02/21/2008 9:40:50 PM PST by SmithL
I agree, he was offered treatment, including the removal of his social finger, it was not effective.
For me, there are all sorts of these hand wringing stories, and I’ve passed my MTBFR on them.
” You gotta feed him, you gotta give him medical care, etc.”
Why?
I don’t like the idea of being put in the position of having to give this guy medical care, but if he was diagnosed with a problem, he should have been taken care of.
Folks, I don’t like it eather, but we do need to provide humanitarian treatment of prisoners, even if illegal immigrants.
Now, when the problem was diagnosed, he should have been given special dispensation, released back to El Salvador so that he could seek treatment down there.
He didn’t belong here. We shouldn’t foot the bill.
Had a friend who had his amputated too. Left him with a ten inch stub.
” You gotta feed him, you gotta give him medical care, etc.”
Why?
Because, unless he’s been given a death sentence, no one should be dying from neglect in prison. The crimes he was convicted of were not death penalty offenses.
He’s totally incapable of getting medical treatment on his own.
Therefore, if he’s in prison, we taxpayers provide treatment.
What’s the alternative? That every man or woman in prison, whether for tax evasion, grand theft, drug possession, assault, or even the few who are innocent (and we know they are there), is subject to a sentence of no medical or dental care while incarcerated.
I could not go along with that. Except perhaps for those who are waiting for the chair anyway.
Ouch.....the Catholics aren’t kidding around when they say kids will be punished for masturbation.
“Castaneda left his native El Salvador with his mother during a civil war and entered the United States illegally when he was 10.”
It WAS pretty rough down there 25 years ago. IIRC, even some nuns were raped and murdered.
When I die I am donating mine. I figure if I can help two or three guys lead a better life, so be it. :)
I always thought that fell under the rule of “don’t ask, don’t tell”.
Now with a stub like that....
...some rules are made to be broken.
Well, for example the word “custody” itself means “guardianship” or “in the care of”, not simply that the guy isn’t free to leave of his own volition. It means that you’re taking responsibility for the guy.
Somebody said he wouldn’t have got good medical care in El Salvador. If the guy were from Ethiopia, would it be OK not to feed him? If you don’t want to assume the responsibilities of having someone in custody because he wouldn’t be any better off back in El Salvador, then send him back there.
Now another Freeper responded to the same post and said that medical treatment was given, but wasn’t successful. If so, then fine. I’ll have to reread the original article.
That seems the most reasonable solution of all. I don't like paying for medical treatment (or anything, for that matter) for illegals, but if you're going to keep the guy locked up, you don't leave yourself with much choice.
Ok, so he WAS treated after all, making the entire story a lie. Sue Los Angeles County if you want.
Yes, that’s true. Thanks for the response.
Prayers for a misguided soul.
But the problem first came to medical attention in December 2005, 13 months earlier. If they didn’t want to treat him while in custody, they should have released him promptly so he could seek his own treatment. Since he was an illegal, they probably should have deported him rather than simply release him if they didn’t want to hold him (and treat him).
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.