Re: The fight is being lost...
From: art fougner, md (evsono@pipeline.com)
Sat Sep 25 11:37:17 2004
Pretty much what many were doing as Level I studies ...
art
PS
Another way to look at this is the difference between a physical exam
and a photograph ... and photographers don't take insurance either.
At Thu, 23 Sep 2004, Philippe Jeanty, MD, PhD wrote:
>SNIP
I'll also tell them
>that I have no idea what I am actually looking at, but that it is great fun
>to see those kids yawning all day long !
>
>Sounds like a winning proposition !
>
> _____
>
>From: ultrasound@obgyn.net [mailto:ultrasound@obgyn.net] On Behalf Of
>DoctorJoe@aol.com
>Sent: Thursday, September 23, 2004 3:23 PM
>To: Multiple recipients of list ULTRASOUND
>Subject: Re: The fight is being lost...
>
>In a message dated 9/23/04 09:20:23, jeanty@TheFetus.net writes:
>
>http://www.nytimes.com/2004/09/23/technology/circuits/23ultr.html?th
>
>"Women love it," said Matt Evans, a lawyer, who started his company, Baby
>Insight (baby -insight.com), about a year and a half ago. "They get to see
>their baby and have an emotional experience with their baby."
>Mr. Evans said his technicians have performed more than 2,000 ultrasounds at
>the company's only location, in Potomac, Md. Baby Insight's highest-priced
>package, for $260, includes a video with background music, one 8-by-10, two
>5-by-7, and 10 wallet-size color photos, four announcement cards and a
>chance for friends and family members to view the ultrasound images as they
>are produced on a large screen in the company's theater room.
>Mr. Evans said his employees tell customers that the ultrasounds are not
>meant to be a substitute for a doctor's exam.
>
>Couple of observations:
>
>1) he's a lawyer, doing what (many) lawyers love to do - make money (not all
>of them, however);
>
>2) the mother/parents are bonding with the baby - that's NOT a bad thing;
>
>3) there IS a disclaimer that it's NOT a "medical" ultrasound.
>
>So, in the absence of compelling reasons for DANGER of the procedure to the
>baby, we have three things to argue:
>
>1) is it bad for lawyers to make money?
>
>2) is it bad for parents to bond with feti?
>
>3) are patients too stupid to understand the disclaimer?
>
>Of course, if you make a case for danger to the fetus from the 'rays', then
>all bets are off.
>
>Joe P.
--
art fougner, md
ich bin ein New Yorker
