Since when is asking an institution to buy you things considered amends? You misused their equipment and put yourself and others at risk. When told to stop, you brought in catalogs and acted like they should be glad to be your personal Santa. Their lack of willingness to comply with your unreasonable demands is then called lip service, and made you “desperate”. Then you had an incident in the parking lot that was completely out of control. You got the boot. So you filed what amounts to a false complaint with the DOJ, still firmly believing that the club owes you something. They don’t.
You falsely believed you were entitled to something that you are not. I posted the relevant sections of the law, including the fact that Exercise machines and exercise equipment shall not be required to comply. Exercise equipment is not required to be able to be used by every individual with every imaginable disability. Some disabled people will be able to use the machine that you were not able to. Your disability is not the only type out there.
I think you have entitlement issues combined with a big dollop of narcissism Jamie. In other words, an assaholic. You are demanding and believe that you are owed special treatment and become irrationally angry when your demands are not met. It’s as if you get off on going off on people. No normal person goes around demanding documentation from strangers in parking lots. You are always 100% in the right and everyone else is either wrong or they don’t understand how supremely special you are. You read motive and intent based upon your own personal hypersensitivity into every look people give you or remark they make.
Have you had therapy to deal with all of this? Believe me, your outlook and behavior is not normal.
It is a crying shame when anyone loses the use of any part of their body, through their own carelessness or that of a doctor, or both. I don’t think you see how you manage to turn the natural compassion that most people have for someone in your condition into being completely turned off by you.
Yes, a patient being paralyzed is a bad outcome. However, the patient bleeding to death while you’re setting up equipment to prevent them becoming paralyzed is an even worse outcome…and one that will get you slapped with a much bigger, much more winnable lawsuit. There is, after all, a reason nobody worries about breaking a few ribs when they’re doing CPR. As such, I’m not willing to comment on whether or not malpractice actually took place; I don’t know how long it takes to set up the bypass machine or how fast he was bleeding out, so pontificating about what should have been done would just be talking out my ass.
Even if he wasn’t bleeding that badly and there was time to hook him up to a bypass, I’m still not comfortable saying “God complex/OMG, he screwed up, let’s throw rocks at him” while giving the OP a pass for his own screw-ups because “youthful zeal/everybody makes mistakes sometimes.” And let’s face it, the OP screwed up. Multiple times. And he can’t even blame his screw-ups on being in a pressured, emergency situation. He was drinking and driving, he was driving too fast, and he wasn’t wearing a seat belt. If he had even just limited to the first two mistakes, he probably wouldn’t have needed the surgery in the first place because the seat belt would have kept him from hitting the steering wheel and tearing his aorta.
Giving all the blame to person who potentially made one mistake under a high pressure, this guy is trying to die on the table situation and none at all to the person who made a series of mistakes while under no pressure at all…I’m sorry, that’s just bullshit.
For what its worth, I found an article from a few years ago about traumatic aorta injuries. It seems the accepted practice is to clamp and stitch it up. However, the article says that the bypass machine should be used as the feared negatives aren’t really all that negative. From what I gather, it looks like the recommended treatment is in the process of changing. I doubt what happened to Jamie rises to the level of malpractice, but there is enough out there to make going to trail risky. I’d imagine they figured they could win, but probably settled to save money.
With a BAC of .06 that was registered some time after the accident occurred via a blood test at the hospital, I’d have to say you are seriously under-reporting the amount you had to drink at that party.
He would have died if he had not received the care he did. He is observably alive, and observably in a better state than if he had not received the care he did. There is no reasonable way to say the care he got was bad.
Yeah. Spacing three drinks out over three hours would essentially make it like having one drink…which would mean he has a body mass of something like 95# to have a BAC that high.
Exactly this. Is there some form of cosmic accounting that ensures he “pays” for what he did? Absolutely not. Did Jamie significantly contribute to the circumstances that brought about his handicap? Absolutely yes. Yeah, a lot of young guys who think they are ten foot tall and bulletproof drink and drive dangerously, and most of them, most of the time, get away with it. I did, when I was young and stupid, I wrecked a car when I was 19 and was lucky to walk free. So some skate free altogether, some like me have a near miss that straightens them up real fast, some, like our hero here, end up wrapped around a lamppost and either dead or injured. Nobody says it has to be fair that one guy gets a cool scar and a good story, another gets 6 foot of dirt and Jamie here ends up crippled for life, all it means is that they made decisions that increased the chances of the harm that ensued. Deserve’s got nothin’ to do with it.
I think you’re excluding a middle here. You’re making a binary judgment - alive or not alive - when there are multiple dimensions along which recovery can be judged - not alive, alive and quadriplegic, alive and paraplegic, alive and not paralyzed might be one set of outcomes that better describes the situation. There is certainly a way he could be better off than he is, and it may be the case that his resultant paralysis is due to bad decisions, even though the worst outcome (death) was avoided.
I’m intentionally avoiding comment on whether I think Jamie has a point or not.
I don’t know how to calculate BAC so I won’t comment on that (though three beers over 3 hours never registered right with me), but I’d guess, based on the pictures I’ve seen, that he was probably about 150-160ish before the accident if he wasn’t a body builder at the time and if he was in the 5’8’’ neighborhood. IOW, he probably isn’t 95lbs, but he’s a pretty slim guy.
You can’t be serious. So as long as someone doesn’t die, it doesn’t matter how sloppy your work is or what unnecessary problems are caused by it? What is wrong with holding doctors to some acceptable standard of care?
I realize now that I made a mistake in bringing this personal matter to the SDMB. I am no longer discussing the issues of my accident or the resulting lawsuit. It has turned into something I never quite imagined it to be. This is no one’s fault but my own of course, I am the one who chose to talk about this stuff in the first place. However, I never wanted such pessimism and negativity to be a part of it. I’m sure the conversation will have no trouble continuing without me.