On Tue, 04 Sep 2007 14:11:39 GMT, " bozak"
<___bozak1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
>"Way Back Jack" <nospam@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:46dd42a4.1507437@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> On Tue, 04 Sep 2007 00:26:37 GMT, " bozak"
>> <___bozak1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>"Way Back Jack" <chillin'@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>>>news:46dc98c1.43229890@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>> On Mon, 03 Sep 2007 23:14:11 GMT, " bozak"
>>>> <___bozak1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>>>
>>>my puppet says what?
>>>
>>>lol... whose benefit are you posting this **** for puppet??? i dont
read it,
>>>and i can asure you that no one else is... so either you are posting it
for
>>>your own benefit, or you just enjoy having me pull your strings... :-)
>>>
>>>puppet posts next bs i wont be reading here______________________
>>>
>>>_______________________________________________________
>>>
>>>
>>>_________________________________________________________
>>>
>>>
>>>_________________________________________________________
(...)
Two years after Nicholas Lemann’s piece first appeared, however, those
****traying Patrick Chavis as a poster boy for racial preferences saw
their efforts blow up in their faces. On June 19, 1997, the California
Medical Board suspended his license to practice medicine, citing his
“inability to perform some of the most basic duties required of a
physician.” Finding him guilty of gross negligence and incompetence in
the cases of three patients—one of whom had died—California
Administrative Law Judge Samuel Reyes said that letting him “continue
in the practice of organized medicine will endanger the public health,
safety and welfare.” Soon after, the Los Angeles District Attorney
announced that Chavis was the object of a criminal investigation.
According to medical board investigators, Chavis had engaged in
egregious malpractice while performing liposuction procedures on
patients in a body-sculpting practice he had started as a side
business after taking a cosmetic surgery seminar in Beverly Hills. For
doctors looking for easy cash, liposuction had become a lucrative and
largely unregulated business, and Chavis’s New Attitude Body Sculpting
had flourished, even in hardbitten Compton. But the four day short
course Chavis had attended left him inadequately prepared to handle
complications. Patients who lived told harrowing tales of Chavis’s
post operative neglect when the procedures he had performed went bad.
After one botched procedure, Chavis stashed a patient in his home
instead of admitting her to the hospital. Abandoning her for nearly
forty hours, the doctor refused to return the frantic phone calls of
the patient, who lost nearly 70% of her blood and was admitted to a
hospital with a severe abdominal infection. A second patient told an
almost identical story: a botched liposuction, massive internal
bleeding, and Chavis’s almost inhuman indifference to her suffering. A
third patient was not as lucky. After another botched procedure,
Chavis left her in his office for four and half hours, her blood
pressure plummeting from severe abdominal hemorrhage, which left his
clinic floor puddled with blood. By nightfall she was in cardiac
arrest and died while her husband rushed her to the hospital.
Medical board investigators also heard from a doctor who had worked
with Chavis. Citing “poor impulse control and sensitivity to patients’
pain,” the doctor gave investigators a tape recording of patients
screaming horrifically, with Chavis responding, “Don’t talk to the
doctor while he is working,” and, “Liar, liar, pants on fire.” In
addition, Chavis refused to take responsibility for anything that had
happened to his patients. According to investigators, at one point
Chavis said that it was the husband of the dead patient who should be
brought up on charges, claiming that he had picked her up and put her
into a wheelchair after surgery in violation of procedure. At another
point he said he was the victim of a racist medical system that didn’t
like to see a black doctor do well.
Whether Chavis’s egregious professional misconduct was an indictment
of the affirmative action policies that launched him in his medical
career more than twenty years before, or just the tragic meltdown of
an individual with personal problems was debatable. But after having
set him up as such a model for “diversity” in university admissions,
news organizations should have at least felt an obligation to re****t
the sequel to the story. Indeed, as most journalists freely admitted
when I spoke to them about the case, if it had been Alan Bakke who was
caught in such flagrant malpractice the press would have been all over
the story without questioning the newsworthiness of such a
development. But most of the media—print and broadcast, local and
national—ducked the tragic denouement of the Patrick Chavis story.
The Los Angeles Times, which had profiled Chavis in glowing terms as a
victim of white racism several years before, re****ted Chavis’s
suspension, as well as the gruesome details behind it when the story
first broke. But it took more than two months for the paper to
identify him as the same Dr. Patrick Chavis who allegedly made the
case for affirmative action. And even when it did get around to
tackling that angle of the story, the LA Times did so in the most
anguished and ambiguous terms, giving space to defenders of
affirmative action who rejected the notion that Chavis’s downfall
stood for anything larger than one man’s weakness and allowing Chavis
himself to call the official sanctions against him “a lynching.” The
same was true of the Wa****ngton Post, which ran nothing about the
Chavis case in its national news pages, but did run a snide op-ed
piece disparaging those who would make the Chavis case “a cautionary
tale” about the danger of racial preference.
(...
|
