Guest guest Posted January 15, 2002 Report Share Posted January 15, 2002 chineseh> -- I would put " unprofessional " first and " negligent " second. > Negligent is a term in law that has potentially serious financial >and punitive repercussions. Perhaps more people will be prodded into > learning some medical Chinese when someone is sued for negligence >for practicing Chinese medicine while being ignorant of the >literature. Let's see if I understand this. If I took a Chinese/English dictionary, and acquired one of the hundreds of tcm journals written in Chinese, and I looked up one character at a time, and say a couple of weeks later finished with my " translation " , that I would then not be considered negligent? That I then could lift my head up high and feel " professional " ? And that I am now not longer " ignorant " of the literature and therefore able to practice Chinese medicine? Give me a break! If what you're saying is true, then let me ask you this: Who do you think would be considered more negligent in a court o law: he/she who claims to read the literature and misses an article, or he/she who does not make any claims about reading medical Chinese? Guilty by knowledge? I do believe that one should learn something about the Chinese language and in particular medical Chinese. Not because it would make one a better practitioner, but because it's part of the art form and it can't and shouldn't be ignored. However, if I thought that my patients were receiving substandard care due to my ignorance of the language, then I would just give it up now. It would not be fair to them to have to wait 'til I can read a few journals before proper care was administered. There are more important aspects of practice than learning medical Chinese such as, bedside manners, compassion, ethics, intuition, to name a few. If one lacks the above but can read Chinese, then he/she is no better than a technician and far from being a healer. >I have been told that one can be sued for negligence as a doctor if >one does not keep up with the most important journals. But if one of those " important journals " finds direct moxa effective, would you use it here in the States without the risk of being negligent? > For instance, if you're hauled into court for using a treatment method that others have found fault with, you can't use as your excuse the fact that you didn't read the article in which that treatment was criticized. Just because someone criticizes a treatment or finds fault with it does not validate or negate a thing. Just like the moxa example. > not being able to read any of those languages might very > well be considered negligent in its legal sense. How many in this list can truly say they read those languages sufficiently to not be considered negligent? Can I claim to play Chopin's Concerto No.1 Em, just because I can find every note on the keyboard? >To make this hypothesis more interesting, Oh..this is just a hypothesis. I'm sorry, disregard the above. Fernando (Law). Failure to exercise the degree of care considered reasonable under the circumstances, resulting in an unintended injury to another party. The omission of the care usual under the circumstances, being convertible with the Roman culpa. A specialist is bound to higher skill and diligence in his specialty than one who is not a specialist, and liability for negligence varies acordingly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 15, 2002 Report Share Posted January 15, 2002 However, if I thought that my patients were receiving substandard care due to my ignorance of the language, then I would just give it up now. >>>>My practice is basically a referral practice and almost all my patients have been treated by other TCM practioners. Are they negligent because of failures or am I if I do. To be negligent you first have to show evidence that the alternative is more appropriate. When I see more reliable information coming out of these journal may be we could use them as a standard A specialist is bound to higher skill and diligence in his specialty than one who is not a specialist, and liability for negligence varies acordingly.>>>>And only to the specialists in his physical area. If you are a surgeon and you are not the best qualified to do a surgery but you are the only one in as area you can do it regardless of outcome, legally speaking Alon - fbernall Tuesday, January 15, 2002 6:40 PM Re: Negligence chineseh> -- I would put "unprofessional" first and "negligent" second. > Negligent is a term in law that has potentially serious financial >and punitive repercussions. Perhaps more people will be prodded into > learning some medical Chinese when someone is sued for negligence >for practicing Chinese medicine while being ignorant of the >literature. Let's see if I understand this. If I took a Chinese/English dictionary, and acquired one of the hundreds of tcm journals written in Chinese, and I looked up one character at a time, and say a couple of weeks later finished with my "translation", that I would then not be considered negligent? That I then could lift my head up high and feel "professional"? And that I am now not longer "ignorant" of the literature and therefore able to practice Chinese medicine? Give me a break!If what you're saying is true, then let me ask you this: Who do you think would be considered more negligent in a court o law: he/she who claims to read the literature and misses an article, or he/she who does not make any claims about reading medical Chinese? Guilty by knowledge?I do believe that one should learn something about the Chinese language and in particular medical Chinese. Not because it would make one a better practitioner, but because it's part of the art form and it can't and shouldn't be ignored.However, if I thought that my patients were receiving substandard care due to my ignorance of the language, then I would just give it up now. It would not be fair to them to have to wait 'til I can read a few journals before proper care was administered. There are more important aspects of practice than learning medical Chinese such as, bedside manners, compassion, ethics, intuition, to name a few. If one lacks the above but can read Chinese, then he/she is no better than a technician and far from being a healer.>I have been told that one can be sued for negligence as a doctor if >one does not keep up with the most important journals.But if one of those "important journals" finds direct moxa effective, would you use it here in the States without the risk of being negligent?> For instance, if you're hauled into court for using a treatment method that others have found fault with, you can't use as your excuse the fact that you didn't read the article in which that treatment was criticized. Just because someone criticizes a treatment or finds fault with it does not validate or negate a thing. Just like the moxa example.> not being able to read any of those languages might very > well be considered negligent in its legal sense. How many in this list can truly say they read those languages sufficiently to not be considered negligent? Can I claim to play Chopin's Concerto No.1 Em, just because I can find every note on the keyboard?>To make this hypothesis more interesting,Oh..this is just a hypothesis. I'm sorry, disregard the above.Fernando(Law). Failure to exercise the degree of care considered reasonable under the circumstances, resulting in an unintended injury to another party. The omission of the care usual under the circumstances, being convertible with the Roman culpa. A specialist is bound to higher skill and diligence in his specialty than one who is not a specialist, and liability for negligence varies acordingly.Chinese Herbal Medicine, a voluntary organization of licensed healthcare practitioners, matriculated students and postgraduate academics specializing in Chinese Herbal Medicine, provides a variety of professional services, including board approved online continuing education. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 16, 2002 Report Share Posted January 16, 2002 , " fbernall " <fbernall@a...> wrote: > But if one of those " important journals " finds direct moxa effective, > would you use it here in the States without the risk of being > negligent? > > > Hi Fernando, I realize you are just using this as an example (and that it's kind of off-topic) but what makes the use of direct moxibustion negligence? I realize in some jurisdictions it is prohibited, but I and a sizable number of my colleagues do direct moxibustion daily without mishap. It's possibly the lowest risk of injury of any form of moxibustion when done properly. take care, robert Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 16, 2002 Report Share Posted January 16, 2002 Fernando, According to my reading, neither Z'ev nor I said that not being able to read Chinese was negligent or unprofessional. Z'ev was reporting what someone else said. I was then commenting on the legal possibility of a court of law some time in the future saying that not having direct access to the majority of the literature was negligent. For me, the words that I would personally choose are " uninformed " and " naive. " By this last word, I mean Webster's definition: " a genuine, innocent simplicity... but sometimes connotes an almost foolish lack of worldly wisdom. " Bob , " fbernall " <fbernall@a...> wrote: > Robert, > > I do not mean to imply that use of direct moxa is negligent. I > remember a patient from Korea who's back was full of scars the size of > quarter. My point is that if I use direct burning on the skin, and if > for some reason the same becomes infected, can I use the literature in > Chinese to justify scarring the tissue and scape negligence? > > Another example, a while back a colleague spoke of a treatment for > shingles with seven star needle followed by cupping which he saw in > China. Very effective he said. Can I justify such treatment here in > the States and escape charges of negligence should infection follow > because I read it in some Chinese languge journal? > > I think that what bothers me about it is the insinuation that if one > does not read Chinese tcm journals that one can be considered > negligent and unprofessional. These words carry a lot of weight when > spoken by someone of Bob's and Z'ev's caliber. Words of such nature > instill fear and have a demeaning effect, imo, fwiw. > > Fernando > > > , " kampo36 " <kampo36> wrote: > > , " fbernall " <fbernall@a...> wrote: > > > > > But if one of those " important journals " finds direct moxa > > effective, > > > would you use it here in the States without the risk of being > > > negligent? > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Fernando, > > > > I realize you are just using this as an example (and that it's kind > > of off-topic) but what makes the use of direct moxibustion > > negligence? I realize in some jurisdictions it is prohibited, but I > > and a sizable number of my colleagues do direct moxibustion daily > > without mishap. It's possibly the lowest risk of injury of any form > > of moxibustion when done properly. > > > > take care, > > robert Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 16, 2002 Report Share Posted January 16, 2002 Fernando, Just for the record, I didn't say that not reading Chinese language journals is negligent and unprofessional. I simply quoted a student's opinion on not requiring medical Chinese language as a course of study. On Wednesday, January 16, 2002, at 07:13 AM, fbernall wrote: > Robert, > > I do not mean to imply that use of direct moxa is negligent. I > remember a patient from Korea who's back was full of scars the size of > quarter. My point is that if I use direct burning on the skin, and if > for some reason the same becomes infected, can I use the literature in > Chinese to justify scarring the tissue and scape negligence? > > Another example, a while back a colleague spoke of a treatment for > shingles with seven star needle followed by cupping which he saw in > China. Very effective he said. Can I justify such treatment here in > the States and escape charges of negligence should infection follow > because I read it in some Chinese languge journal? > > I think that what bothers me about it is the insinuation that if one > does not read Chinese tcm journals that one can be considered > negligent and unprofessional. These words carry a lot of weight when > spoken by someone of Bob's and Z'ev's caliber. Words of such nature > instill fear and have a demeaning effect, imo, fwiw. > > Fernando > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.