Laurie wrote: >I suppose the bottom line is, would any of us be "settled down" or as Sandy >says, ''relaxed and comfortable", if our own child or sibling died under >such conditions? But I don't think this is the bottom line. Your concern, quite rightly, is whether the maggots are an indicator of neglect, in this case, with particularly pernicious racist overtones. That was the thrust of your original post I think it is fair to say? You wrote: "Isn't this an absolute bloody disgrace. How could the coroner possibly find that the staff did their best? A 25 year old has died with his ear infested with maggots while in their care. They should be sued for criminal negligence and the coroner should be sacked----fat chance while the people of the Northern Territory keep electing racists like Stone and Burke as Chief Minister." I must admit, I agreed and had come to the same conclusion. However, if I understand Judi correctly, maggots are NOT necessarily an indication of neglect, but are quite a common occurence in this sort of injury. That is, the fact that there were maggots in this wound tells us nothing about whether the patient was neglected, let alone if there were racist overtones. If that is the case, then highlighting the maggots and using that as a basis for outrage is misplaced. This is why she suggested you calm down. So it is not simply a case of "fire in the belly" as Sandy suggests - though again, I agree with Sandy that such an attitude is generally a good thing. It is a case that the fact (maggots) that generated the "fire" was not actually a relevant fact. If that is the case, then Judi is right to suggest that we all "do some research" about the reasons for maggots in this sort of wound. Of course, there might be other reasons for finding nelgelct. It's just that maggots aren't that reason. If we are concluding that people should be "sued for criminal nelgicence" and the coroner "sacked" then our reasons should be solid, shouldn't they, and not just based on an (understandably) emotional reaction to the presence of maggots? That is, if as Judi suggests, maggots don't indicate neglect, then we can't use then as basis for sacking or suing someone for neglect. Tim ------------------------------------------------------ RecOzNet2 has a page @ http://www.green.net.au/recoznet2 and is archived at http://www.mail-archive.com/ To unsubscribe from this list, mail [EMAIL PROTECTED], and in the body of the message, include the words: unsubscribe announce or click here mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?Body=unsubscribe%20announce This posting is provided to the individual members of this group without permission from the copyright owner for purposes of criticism, comment, scholarship and research under the "fair use" provisions of the Federal copyright laws and it may not be distributed further without permission of the copyright owner, except for "fair use." RecOzNet2 is archived for members @ http://www.mail-archive.com/recoznet2%40paradigm4.com.au/
