Why is this a surprise to anyone?
Take any good or service, regulate or prohibit it* and you will end up with the "criminal" element providing, for a price, that which the government can not or will not. From alcohol prohibition to prostitution, marijuana and soon MRI's...
When you think of it though, what this woman has done is not so far removed from what has been going on for years. Those with the money have been skirting the system by travelling to other countries for treatment, its the new millennium's version of crossing the border for a drink. Now they have just found an easier way, good old-fashioned bribery.
How perverted and absurd is it that supposedly free people have to resort to breaking the law in order to have the possibility of saving their own lives, or the lives of their loved ones?
What this country needs is free (unregulated) health care.
* In the case of medical services in Canada they have done both - it is regulated in the sense that the government controls nearly all aspects of our actual physical health care and it is prohibited because anyone providing health care outside of the system is breaking the law.
Showing posts with label health care. Show all posts
Showing posts with label health care. Show all posts
Sunday, November 28, 2010
Saturday, June 26, 2010
Saturday, May 29, 2010
Time to Pay Up
UPDATE: Second Firm Pulls out of Greece , and the Greeks continue to evade reality...
This is the end of the road for socialized medicine.
Medicine just like bread, automobiles and bowling balls cost a certain amount to produce. That is a fact. It is not a construct of a company or a secret cabal of evil capitalists perpetrating a "brutal blackmail".
It is also not "a violation of corporate social responsibility" the company would not exist, there would be no insulin to buy, and no one to produce it if they (the company) were to ignore the realities of what it takes to produce this or any other product.
It is simply a matter of reality, things cost money, and nothing can be produced for free. Nothing can be supplied indefinitely at a loss. Yes, you might be able to supply it for a time at a loss but as less money comes in less product is produced and soon there is nothing and no company to produce it.
The decree by the Greek government that all medicine prices shall be cut by 25% (so that the government can continue to supply those medicines through the health care system) is a command divorced of reality.
There is a simple solution. Return the portion of taxes that each Greek pays into the health care scheme and allow then to pay for their own medicine at the market rate.
The Greek Government is not the only one to blame for this though. The Greeks have themselves as individuals to blame. Every time they demanded that their government give them more for less, every time they allowed another government program to supply for them something that they should have bought themselves. Every time they asked for more pay and less work, every demand to feather their social safety net led to this.
Reality can not be ignored forever, you may survive for a time while evading it but sooner or later its time to pay up.
Greece's bill is due.
This is the end of the road for socialized medicine.
Medicine just like bread, automobiles and bowling balls cost a certain amount to produce. That is a fact. It is not a construct of a company or a secret cabal of evil capitalists perpetrating a "brutal blackmail".
It is also not "a violation of corporate social responsibility" the company would not exist, there would be no insulin to buy, and no one to produce it if they (the company) were to ignore the realities of what it takes to produce this or any other product.
It is simply a matter of reality, things cost money, and nothing can be produced for free. Nothing can be supplied indefinitely at a loss. Yes, you might be able to supply it for a time at a loss but as less money comes in less product is produced and soon there is nothing and no company to produce it.
The decree by the Greek government that all medicine prices shall be cut by 25% (so that the government can continue to supply those medicines through the health care system) is a command divorced of reality.
There is a simple solution. Return the portion of taxes that each Greek pays into the health care scheme and allow then to pay for their own medicine at the market rate.
The Greek Government is not the only one to blame for this though. The Greeks have themselves as individuals to blame. Every time they demanded that their government give them more for less, every time they allowed another government program to supply for them something that they should have bought themselves. Every time they asked for more pay and less work, every demand to feather their social safety net led to this.
Reality can not be ignored forever, you may survive for a time while evading it but sooner or later its time to pay up.
Greece's bill is due.
Friday, May 28, 2010
McGuinty Plans Surgical Castration
ARTICLE
“The Ontario government is warning doctors that it plans to radically overhaul how they are compensated by paying more of them salaries – the latest salvo in its efforts to rein in the biggest contributors to ballooning health-care costs.”
Sounds like the McGuinty government wants to cut Doctors wages. What does that mean for those of us on the streets. What is that “savings” going to mean at the end of the line (our health care) vice at the start line (the bloated provincial budget)? You can choose from three doors. Behind Door #1 we have fewer people decide to become doctors in Ontario because they will have no control over what they are paid. Door #2 = Doctors stop working as hard because no matter how many patients they see or how many procedures they do they get paid the same amount. Door #3 leads us to an accelerated “brain drain” as more Doctors upon finishing medical school run to the US where they can still (for now) get paid more for what they do than in Canada.
If you guess all three then you are probably correct.
“The McGuinty government has already targeted generic prescription drugs and hospitals as part of a plan to get a bigger bang for its investment in health care. Now it is zeroing in on doctors and a fee-for-service compensation system that has been in place for more than four decades.”
Whoa! Wait a second… “fee-for-service compensation system”? What a ham-fisted attempt to drop the context of the entire issue here. It’s called PAY! Compensation makes it sound like some sort of government run welfare system not a persons honest work and effort.
Would you expect the mechanic at your local garage to fix 10 cars in a day and only charge for 5 of them? Would you trust your car to a mechanic that has been told (forced) that he will fix your car for a certain $value regardless of what is wrong with it?
“I think we’ve got some work to do when it comes to appropriately compensating physicians and others in health care for that matter,” Health Minister Deb Matthews told reporters on Thursday."
No. Government intervention and arbitrary establishment of pay based on political and budgetary concerns rather than value, skill and complexity is about as far removed from “appropriate compensation” as one can get.
“The majority of Ontario’s approximately 24,000 doctors are paid on a fee-for-service basis, meaning they bill the provincial health plan for each service they provide to a patient. But in recent years, some hospitals, particularly those in smaller, rural communities, have switched to a salary system for doctors in their emergency departments. As well, the 1,900 doctors who work in clinics as part of family health teams created by the McGuinty government are also paid a salary.”
Fee for service means if the Doctor works harder he is paid more.
What will the alternative mean?
No incentive.
Ha! These people are actually holding up rural Canada as a model that they are trying to emulate? Didn’t I hear something about a shortage of Doctors in Rural Ontario/ the rest of the country? Yes, yes I did.
“Ms. Matthews said she would like to see that compensation model expanded to include more doctors. She was responding to a report released this week by Toronto-Dominion Bank, which made eight proposals to wring more efficiencies out of the health-care system, including moving doctors away from the fee-for-service compensation model.
In a system where doctors are paid for each service, the report says, there is no incentive for them to measure the cost-effectiveness of their treatment decisions against the potential benefits.”
$5.00 for anyone who can make rational sense out of the last sentence. Are they really trying to tell us that a set wage will make Doctors think about the cost effectiveness of their work? Or is it that they are saying that Doctors will ration their services more? Pick and choose who gets their limited services from their limited pay.
“Robert Bell, chief executive officer of University Health Network, Ontario’s largest hospital, said the government has to examine the rapid rise in doctors’ compensation, which has far outstripped the increase in hospital budgets.”
Finally a sentence that gets (in an off hand way) to the root of the problem. It’s not that Doctors aren’t worth the money they are paid. Just ask anyone who has undergone a life saving operation. It is the arbitrary allotment of funds by a government who is trying to nickel and dime a system that has never worked properly.
There is no personal incentive in a government run system to innovate or to reduce costs. If hospitals were privately run each would be competing for customers and each would be trying to innovate to reduce costs and take more customers from the other hospitals. Yes, they might even reduce the amount they are willing to pay Doctors, but then the Doctors would be free at least to search for better pay.
Compensation divorced of effort, skill and quantity is a good way to castrate a system that is already suffering from financial erectile dysfunction.
“The Ontario government is warning doctors that it plans to radically overhaul how they are compensated by paying more of them salaries – the latest salvo in its efforts to rein in the biggest contributors to ballooning health-care costs.”
Sounds like the McGuinty government wants to cut Doctors wages. What does that mean for those of us on the streets. What is that “savings” going to mean at the end of the line (our health care) vice at the start line (the bloated provincial budget)? You can choose from three doors. Behind Door #1 we have fewer people decide to become doctors in Ontario because they will have no control over what they are paid. Door #2 = Doctors stop working as hard because no matter how many patients they see or how many procedures they do they get paid the same amount. Door #3 leads us to an accelerated “brain drain” as more Doctors upon finishing medical school run to the US where they can still (for now) get paid more for what they do than in Canada.
If you guess all three then you are probably correct.
“The McGuinty government has already targeted generic prescription drugs and hospitals as part of a plan to get a bigger bang for its investment in health care. Now it is zeroing in on doctors and a fee-for-service compensation system that has been in place for more than four decades.”
Whoa! Wait a second… “fee-for-service compensation system”? What a ham-fisted attempt to drop the context of the entire issue here. It’s called PAY! Compensation makes it sound like some sort of government run welfare system not a persons honest work and effort.
Would you expect the mechanic at your local garage to fix 10 cars in a day and only charge for 5 of them? Would you trust your car to a mechanic that has been told (forced) that he will fix your car for a certain $value regardless of what is wrong with it?
“I think we’ve got some work to do when it comes to appropriately compensating physicians and others in health care for that matter,” Health Minister Deb Matthews told reporters on Thursday."
No. Government intervention and arbitrary establishment of pay based on political and budgetary concerns rather than value, skill and complexity is about as far removed from “appropriate compensation” as one can get.
“The majority of Ontario’s approximately 24,000 doctors are paid on a fee-for-service basis, meaning they bill the provincial health plan for each service they provide to a patient. But in recent years, some hospitals, particularly those in smaller, rural communities, have switched to a salary system for doctors in their emergency departments. As well, the 1,900 doctors who work in clinics as part of family health teams created by the McGuinty government are also paid a salary.”
Fee for service means if the Doctor works harder he is paid more.
What will the alternative mean?
No incentive.
Ha! These people are actually holding up rural Canada as a model that they are trying to emulate? Didn’t I hear something about a shortage of Doctors in Rural Ontario/ the rest of the country? Yes, yes I did.
“Ms. Matthews said she would like to see that compensation model expanded to include more doctors. She was responding to a report released this week by Toronto-Dominion Bank, which made eight proposals to wring more efficiencies out of the health-care system, including moving doctors away from the fee-for-service compensation model.
In a system where doctors are paid for each service, the report says, there is no incentive for them to measure the cost-effectiveness of their treatment decisions against the potential benefits.”
$5.00 for anyone who can make rational sense out of the last sentence. Are they really trying to tell us that a set wage will make Doctors think about the cost effectiveness of their work? Or is it that they are saying that Doctors will ration their services more? Pick and choose who gets their limited services from their limited pay.
“Robert Bell, chief executive officer of University Health Network, Ontario’s largest hospital, said the government has to examine the rapid rise in doctors’ compensation, which has far outstripped the increase in hospital budgets.”
Finally a sentence that gets (in an off hand way) to the root of the problem. It’s not that Doctors aren’t worth the money they are paid. Just ask anyone who has undergone a life saving operation. It is the arbitrary allotment of funds by a government who is trying to nickel and dime a system that has never worked properly.
There is no personal incentive in a government run system to innovate or to reduce costs. If hospitals were privately run each would be competing for customers and each would be trying to innovate to reduce costs and take more customers from the other hospitals. Yes, they might even reduce the amount they are willing to pay Doctors, but then the Doctors would be free at least to search for better pay.
Compensation divorced of effort, skill and quantity is a good way to castrate a system that is already suffering from financial erectile dysfunction.
Wednesday, February 24, 2010
Robber mentality.
I truly wish more people could see the health care issue this way.
In a related note as was pointed out to me by Mike Davidson on FB, Danny Williams decision to go to Florida in spite of his support for the Canada health act is no more (or less) hypocritical than the robber who locks his own door when he goes out to rob other peoples houses.
In a related note as was pointed out to me by Mike Davidson on FB, Danny Williams decision to go to Florida in spite of his support for the Canada health act is no more (or less) hypocritical than the robber who locks his own door when he goes out to rob other peoples houses.
Tuesday, February 23, 2010
The Second Tier
Danny Williams proves what those of us who are paying attention already know. There are two tiers of health care in Canada already.
The first tier is the majority that can only afford to pay 40% of their taxes to Canada's bloated health care mafia and accept the service that provides them. The second tier are those who can afford to do that, and escape the mediocre service of nationalized health care and pay for the best healthcare that money can buy... elsewhere.
I don't begrudge Danny getting the best for him, that's rational. However I'd like to remind everyone that in the future when Danny boy comes out in favor of the Canada health act he is being nothing short of hypocritical.
The first tier is the majority that can only afford to pay 40% of their taxes to Canada's bloated health care mafia and accept the service that provides them. The second tier are those who can afford to do that, and escape the mediocre service of nationalized health care and pay for the best healthcare that money can buy... elsewhere.
I don't begrudge Danny getting the best for him, that's rational. However I'd like to remind everyone that in the future when Danny boy comes out in favor of the Canada health act he is being nothing short of hypocritical.
Wednesday, February 3, 2010
Monday, December 7, 2009
Meditarianism
When 50% of a province's resources are concentrated on running a single program then you no longer have a government run program, you have a program run government.
This is the situation Ontario finds itself in. According to the Frasier Institute next year the Ontario government will spend more than half its revenue on health care, the year after New Brunswick will follow suit, by 2034 four more provinces will follow suit...
With no alternative available to the citizens, the government is essentially nothing more than a support system for medical totalitarianism.
In Meditarian Canada, health care runs you!
This is the situation Ontario finds itself in. According to the Frasier Institute next year the Ontario government will spend more than half its revenue on health care, the year after New Brunswick will follow suit, by 2034 four more provinces will follow suit...
With no alternative available to the citizens, the government is essentially nothing more than a support system for medical totalitarianism.
In Meditarian Canada, health care runs you!
Friday, September 18, 2009
Hippocrates Shrugged
In Obama's America, health care manages you...
EDIT
An excellent post from F.I.R.M. (Freedom and Individual Rights in Medicine) to add fuel to your intellectual fire.
45 percent of American physicians “would consider leaving their practice or taking an early retirement”In the event that this 45% of doctors follow through, that would leave the rest not in a profession but in virtual slavery.
EDIT
An excellent post from F.I.R.M. (Freedom and Individual Rights in Medicine) to add fuel to your intellectual fire.
Sunday, August 16, 2009
The Government Effect
Health reform in Canada... have none of these people ever heard of the law of unintended consequences?
Unintended consequences are outcomes that are not (or not limited to) the results originally intended in a particular situation. They may be foreseen or unforeseen, but they should be the logical or likely results of the action.
Now what do you think might be the unintended consequence of this:
Bureaucracy's love their budgets, its how they live. When they are given a set budget they will spend it all, every time, in the hopes that;
a) It won't be cut next year because they proved through frugality or efficiency that they did not need all the cash and;
b) That if they spend it all they will have the opportunity to ask for more for next year so that the bureaucracy can expand (as is their wont).
But the good Doctor is proposing an open budget. One that (apparently) rewards the bureaucracy for its efficiency.
But in the land of unintended consequences is quality a necessary part of the equation? No. The only necessary part of the equation would become processing the largest possible volume of patients to receive the largest possible payment.
This system would not be a problem in a free market because if the quality of the service dropped to meet the need of efficiency then the patient would be able to go somewhere else and the offending business would be forced out of business by the companies offering both quality and efficiency.
But since all hospitals in this country are state owned there is no hope for a market correction of that type, and what you would have is hospitals becoming sausage factories. With no reason to offer quality and efficiency, then efficiency (expediency) will win out.
Once that budgetary imperative has taken hold, the other unintended consequence will rear it's head, namely the cost of health care in this country will go through the roof, which means our taxes will go through the roof.
There ought to be a corollary to the Law of Unintended Consequences called "The Government Effect" stating simply that when any government program results in unintended consequences the cost of said unintended consequences is inevitably downloaded onto the individual in the form of some tax levied against him or some sacrifice of his freedom.
Unintended consequences are outcomes that are not (or not limited to) the results originally intended in a particular situation. They may be foreseen or unforeseen, but they should be the logical or likely results of the action.
Now what do you think might be the unintended consequence of this:
Dr Ouellet is counting on all those positive consequences he's already concluded would be the result. But understanding the nature of bureaucracy isn't his forte apparently."He has also said the Canadian system could be restructured to focus on patients if hospitals and health-care institutions received funding based on the patients they treat, instead of an annual, lump-sum budget.
This "activity-based funding" would be an incentive to provide more efficient care, he has said."
Bureaucracy's love their budgets, its how they live. When they are given a set budget they will spend it all, every time, in the hopes that;
a) It won't be cut next year because they proved through frugality or efficiency that they did not need all the cash and;
b) That if they spend it all they will have the opportunity to ask for more for next year so that the bureaucracy can expand (as is their wont).
But the good Doctor is proposing an open budget. One that (apparently) rewards the bureaucracy for its efficiency.
But in the land of unintended consequences is quality a necessary part of the equation? No. The only necessary part of the equation would become processing the largest possible volume of patients to receive the largest possible payment.
This system would not be a problem in a free market because if the quality of the service dropped to meet the need of efficiency then the patient would be able to go somewhere else and the offending business would be forced out of business by the companies offering both quality and efficiency.
But since all hospitals in this country are state owned there is no hope for a market correction of that type, and what you would have is hospitals becoming sausage factories. With no reason to offer quality and efficiency, then efficiency (expediency) will win out.
Once that budgetary imperative has taken hold, the other unintended consequence will rear it's head, namely the cost of health care in this country will go through the roof, which means our taxes will go through the roof.
There ought to be a corollary to the Law of Unintended Consequences called "The Government Effect" stating simply that when any government program results in unintended consequences the cost of said unintended consequences is inevitably downloaded onto the individual in the form of some tax levied against him or some sacrifice of his freedom.
Thursday, July 23, 2009
Why Healthcare Is Not A Right
Health Care is Not a Right by Leonard Peikoff
Courtesy of The Ayn Rand Center for Individual Rights
It's a shame that Canada never had a principled and moral argument to counter Tommy Douglas's socialist scheme.
Instead we've had decades of punitive taxation, promises, propaganda and prorogued procedures.
Courtesy of The Ayn Rand Center for Individual Rights
It's a shame that Canada never had a principled and moral argument to counter Tommy Douglas's socialist scheme.
Instead we've had decades of punitive taxation, promises, propaganda and prorogued procedures.
Saturday, July 4, 2009
More Than Meets The Eye
This is amazing. As odd as this man looks, the fact that Doctors have developed procedures like this* is why I would not want to live in any other time in history than right now.
*WARNING GRAPHIC CONTENT
Then I thought of Canada's health care scheme and the fact that we have enslaved our Doctors.
In spite of the decade that it takes to become a doctor in this country, the intellect required, the drive and dedication of the people who develop these kinds of procedures, in the run of a lifetime a plumber will make more money.
Think about it. The guy that hooks up your dishwasher makes more money in the course of his life than the Doctor that delivered your kids, or returns sight to the blind.
Marx would be so proud.
*WARNING GRAPHIC CONTENT
Then I thought of Canada's health care scheme and the fact that we have enslaved our Doctors.
In spite of the decade that it takes to become a doctor in this country, the intellect required, the drive and dedication of the people who develop these kinds of procedures, in the run of a lifetime a plumber will make more money.
Think about it. The guy that hooks up your dishwasher makes more money in the course of his life than the Doctor that delivered your kids, or returns sight to the blind.
Marx would be so proud.
Wednesday, June 3, 2009
The Profit Motive
As soon as you allow government to immerse itself in the provision of services for which people are normally paid, or in which businesses or individuals have a vested interest then you have a recipe for corruption, nepotism and cronyism.
A case in point.
The thing is, the only reason that the hiring of these companies was a crime, the only reason why there has to be this air of transparency is because the Government is involved.
Why this is a problem is because the Government forces you to pay and since it steals your money it wants to assure you through the tendering of contracts or some other mechanism that it isn't going to their friends... at least the ones that don't deserve it. It's all done to assure you that your money isn't being stolen twice.
The reason why I say this is the only reason, is because if you voluntarily called a private company providing the same service, as long as you received those services you wouldn't care if the Doctor or Nurse advising you was related to the company owner would you?
I'm sure that there will be an inquiry into this affair. I'm sure it will cost us (you and I, the taxpayers) a lot of money and I'm equally sure there will be recommendations and reports and news stories and on and on and on and on.
You know what else I'm sure about, that Telehealth Ontario is a pitiful attempt by the government to provide "healthcare".
As costs soar our collective dollars are worth less and less so our level of healthcare is reduced. They take our money and try to pass off a 1-800 number as an innovation in healthcare while people wait months for knee and hip surgery. "Don't go to the emergency room, don't go to the clinic, call this 1-800 number and get medical advice over the phone!" Sounds like a really good idea... Riiiiiiiight..
I'm also sure that if there was such a thing as market competition in the medical field in Canada our costs would be going down... Competition does that, and you know what else, if there was market competition and someone wanted to set up a "Telehealth Business" we wouldn't be left paying for a "commission of inquiry" every time the Owner contracted his buddy to work as a consultant.
Business and Government...
Separate them NOW!
A case in point.
The thing is, the only reason that the hiring of these companies was a crime, the only reason why there has to be this air of transparency is because the Government is involved.
Why this is a problem is because the Government forces you to pay and since it steals your money it wants to assure you through the tendering of contracts or some other mechanism that it isn't going to their friends... at least the ones that don't deserve it. It's all done to assure you that your money isn't being stolen twice.
The reason why I say this is the only reason, is because if you voluntarily called a private company providing the same service, as long as you received those services you wouldn't care if the Doctor or Nurse advising you was related to the company owner would you?
I'm sure that there will be an inquiry into this affair. I'm sure it will cost us (you and I, the taxpayers) a lot of money and I'm equally sure there will be recommendations and reports and news stories and on and on and on and on.
You know what else I'm sure about, that Telehealth Ontario is a pitiful attempt by the government to provide "healthcare".
As costs soar our collective dollars are worth less and less so our level of healthcare is reduced. They take our money and try to pass off a 1-800 number as an innovation in healthcare while people wait months for knee and hip surgery. "Don't go to the emergency room, don't go to the clinic, call this 1-800 number and get medical advice over the phone!" Sounds like a really good idea... Riiiiiiiight..
I'm also sure that if there was such a thing as market competition in the medical field in Canada our costs would be going down... Competition does that, and you know what else, if there was market competition and someone wanted to set up a "Telehealth Business" we wouldn't be left paying for a "commission of inquiry" every time the Owner contracted his buddy to work as a consultant.
Business and Government...
Separate them NOW!
Friday, November 7, 2008
Pope Signs Death sentence
Apparently the meaning of the word donation is more important than saving a persons life.
"buying and selling of organs ... would go against the meaning of donation"
In Canada according to this article 46% of patients waiting for a Kidney died in the average 2.4 years they were followed for the study. This is in spite of the fact that a person can live with just one kidney.
The article is chock full of tidbits like this...
Meh, it doesn't really matter, because once again, the church proves it is all about suffering, it's more interested in some ethereal piety and altruistic nonsense than it is in you, your life, the ones you love and your/their continued existence.
My hat is off to the propagandists of the church though... That they continue to be able to convince people that it is better to die than to pay for a service is amazing. The two Joe's (Joseph Goebbels and Joseph Stalin) must be prostrating themselves in the grave at the thought of it.
"buying and selling of organs ... would go against the meaning of donation"
In Canada according to this article 46% of patients waiting for a Kidney died in the average 2.4 years they were followed for the study. This is in spite of the fact that a person can live with just one kidney.
The article is chock full of tidbits like this...
"A relatively small proportion of patients received a transplant: 10.6 per cent for those receiving a kidney from a deceased donor and 5.8 per cent for live donors."I wonder, how many people would voluntarily exchange a kidney for a suitable cash payment...
Meh, it doesn't really matter, because once again, the church proves it is all about suffering, it's more interested in some ethereal piety and altruistic nonsense than it is in you, your life, the ones you love and your/their continued existence.
My hat is off to the propagandists of the church though... That they continue to be able to convince people that it is better to die than to pay for a service is amazing. The two Joe's (Joseph Goebbels and Joseph Stalin) must be prostrating themselves in the grave at the thought of it.
Thursday, January 17, 2008
When Profit Is A Sin, All We Are Left With Is...
“So giving someone a kidney is a good deed, but selling the same kidney is a
felony.”
Friday, November 16, 2007
God! Think of the Children!!! (Never post while channelling a socialist)
Proof of the horrible and inhuman capitalist system.
How dare they do this without billing the taxpayer for the good deed!!! This philanthropy will not go unpunished!!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Here is a woman who is basically bragging about having "rehabilitated" a cold blooded killer. A man who would kill anyone for the right amount of cash. Who shows no remorse and thinks of his murders as "another day at the office".
What'smore, reading the comments section I'm flabbergasted that the only thing that bothers the commentators on the page (presumably other doctors) is that the article claims that a psychologist prescribed meds...
This article doesn't showcase ethical action but moral apathy. It's not that this "doctor" doesn't recognize that her patient is an evil cold blooded murderer it's that her position as a Doctor has given her a free pass at having to judge the moral from the immoral. What an abject failure this woman is as a rational human being.
I will go farther. She is evil. Pure unmitigated evil. She is right up there with the guards at Dachau and Auschwitz claiming ignorance and innocence because they didn't actually drop the gas pellets into the chambers, or stuff bodies into the ovens.
"Best Doctor" eh? Well done Dr. Alice Mengele.