Lonelygirl15

aaaand maybe its just the years of Catholic school talking, but that looked like a "Jesus hand wound" if ya know what I mean.... not saying that Jonas=savior in this scenario, but it could have some symbolism

I mean we analyze everything else around here so, why not?

khjq wrote:I've never seen someone try to pick a lock with a freakin screw driver...he could of unscrewed it instead or tried to bash it open or break a window and climb in...but he probably would of cut his head off doing that though...

sodvest wrote:.... and then MacGyver walks in, pokes at the door, it opens immediately, shakes his head and walks away.....

steamboat wrote:

aaaand maybe its just the years of Catholic school talking, but that looked like a "Jesus hand wound" if ya know what I mean.... not saying that Jonas=savior in this scenario, but it could have some symbolism

I mean we analyze everything else around here so, why not?

Thaaaaaank you. I went through this whole topic waiting for someone to bring that up. IF the creators suddenly wanted one of them to be injured, that's understandable. But why put a a freaking hole through the center of Jonas's hand? STIGMATA, anyone?

PixieSailor wrote:

Chelseyrl wrote: no worries! I do too... actually, I've noticed that a lot of Minnesotans do too... weird.

*is minesotan*
I don't think I've ever said man like that.......ever.

bethy wrote:An ethicist's commentary on when a veterinarian can render medical assistance to people:
http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articl ... tid=340065

An ethicist's commentary on when a veterinarian can render medical assistance to people

Bernard E. Rollin, Phd





This question is actually dual, legal and ethical. Not being a legal scholar, I will deal primarily with the latter, though legal ramifications of intervening must enter into one's moral reasoning. Exposure to liability in virtue of helping someone has been limited in many jurisdictions by Good Samaritan laws, which protect those who offer assistance of various sorts to people in trouble. The protection provided by these laws is consonant with common sense and protects the Samaritan's right to provide first aid, CPR, and minimal medical assistance that many people are likely to have mastered. It certainly would not protect me if, without cardiac surgical training of any sort, I cracked a chest and administered heart massage.

What the Good Samaritan laws seem to say ethically, is that citizens should not be discouraged from helping others at a rudimentary level commensurate with their expertise by fear of liability. This sounds like a reasonable moral position. We don't want a society where fear of a lawsuit prevents its members from helping one another.

When the Good Samaritan is a person who is medically trained, albeit not a physician, I would think that morally, the public is entitled to expect more in the way of emergency assistance than it expects of an ordinary citizen. The more training and experience in managing that sort of emergency, the more the public is entitled to expect. Thus a military medical corpsman or a veterinarian, both trained to control bleeding, could be expected to accomplish hemostasis in an emergency. Veterinary training for the first 2 years of veterinary school is virtually identical to that of human medical training. At one point, the State of Wyoming considered creating a medical school and training the medical students for their first 2 years at the Colorado State University (CSU) College of Veterinary Medicine. In fact, a graduate of a veterinary school is likely to have more training in surgery than does a medical school graduate.

Given that tissue is tissue and bleeding is bleeding, I would think that a veterinarian facing a laceration emergency with a human could be morally expected — and permitted — to treat the emergency.

The same reasoning should be applicable on a case to case basis, and moral obligation to help, as it were, titrated on the basis of expertise. An academic veterinary heart surgeon with 40 years of experience who has worked in human hospitals during sabbatical leaves is probably more competent to help in the situation described in this case than a physician dermatologist or recent medical school graduate. If the law does not currently embody this insight, it should be modified to do so.

In the spirit of our discussion, Dean Lance Perryman of the CSU College of Veterinary Medicine has made a novel suggestion. He has raised the possibility that, in rural areas deficient in physicians, veterinarians could undergo some additional training analogous to physicians' assistants, in order to provide rudimentary medical care in such communities. In fact, this already occurs de facto in some rural areas where veterinarians treat their clients' cuts and even fractures.

In sum, as regards the case in question, the veterinarian may morally provide emergency help, provided that he or she does not exceed his or her training and comfort level.

I am grateful to Ralph Switzer for dialogue.

lonelygirl wrote: And that much blood too? Come on, be realistic.

Shardsinkitten wrote:bet DB could pick the lock, he's good at the breaking and entering stuff, I dunno why they didn't just have him do it. Though I guess we've never seen him pick a lock before, but all that breaking and entering stuff, you would think he would know how, because well what would of happened if he would of ran into a locked door lol

longlostposter wrote:

lonelygirl wrote: And that much blood too? Come on, be realistic.

As I said previously, it was very realistic. I've had an injury like that before, and it was right on. My injury looked exactly like that, and the amount of blood is accurate. They did an excellent job.

Geena wrote:So, I've been watching LG15 since the very beginning and have been lurking on the forums for quite awhile. I feel very intimidated to be posting here, but hey, I'll give it a shot.