 |
|
 |
 |
| |
|
|
| |
| An American Tragic Story: Justice for the Privileged Few |
 |
by Marcos A. Vargas, MSHA, PA-C - November 14, 2011
|
A former U.S. District Court Judge Samuel Kent, a disgraced former jurist sentenced to prison for obstruction of justice, was released on furlough to attend a family wedding & was planning to serve the rest of his sentence confined to his vacation home in West Texas, according to Chronicle interviews and federal court and prison documents ( retrieved on 11-5-11 from http://www.chron.com/news/houston-texas/article/Disgraced-ex-judge-Kent-out-of-prison-confined-2079070.php). Kent, 62, has served 25 months behind bars. He will be released from his sentence in November after serving 29 of his 33 months, according to a Bureau of Prison email.
Truthfully it was shocking –if not revolting--to see & read that a disgraced and imprisoned federal judge was going to get out early to attend a wedding and then spend the rest of his sentence at his vacation cabin. Had the Houston Chronicle not broken this story, it would have all happened. Per the breaking headlines, apparently officials were willing to bend every rule for this guy who couldn’t stomach the deal once it reached the light of day and they reversed the wedding furlough. Continue reading the story for further details.
So why the big deal you ask? How about the “double standard”…the Two Americas we seem to be living in nowadays. For instance, when the Poor or the socio-economically disadvantaged are less fortunate than others & don’t get the same constitutional rights as most.
Another example, a man named Hubert Lindsey, who did not receive the same constitutional rights as the common man by receiving a lawyer. He is not the only person to receive unfair treatment when dealing with legal representation. But the problem in most states is that they don’t have the money for lawyers to represent disadvantaged citizens; or they’re not trying hard enough. Even though some states were trying to change this injustice seen in recent years, the old ways still remain the same. The main idea of all of this is that many poor, mentally ill, or physically disabled people often times don’t get represented or get sentenced to jail without seeing a lawyer. Basically the law has a way of maneuvering around them. What a travesty of justice.
As we all know, there’s no shortage of critical opinions, political views or professional perspectives about our judicial system. And while the medico-legal repercussions have been evolving and unfolding over the past several decades, the intent by ATLA & The ABA when it comes to our Tort system has been a sovereign one— continue our ill-fated judicial system at any costs.
Furthermore, as already advocated in other writings of mine, while not welcomed by every stakeholder in the health law, Health Courts seems to be the most plausible remedy in the eyes of many Americans since it basically seeks to press ahead with a protective & equality agenda in the deliverance of law to all Americans and not the select few like as we know it currently.
In recent years some opponents and detractors of this novel concept have insidiously attempted to undermine not only the credibility and the worth of this much needed Tort system implementation by using various scare tactics and other smoke screens that do not hold up when scrutinized at a closer look.
But the real issue here in my mind is this: is it fair or acceptable to rescind or take away this benefit imposed by the legal community on aggrieved Americans and/or the medical community?
Is it fair to deny legal access and/or representation to a low-income earner or uninsured American because it will take more money to defend than to recoup? In other words, shouldn’t legal needs or circumstantial qualifications alone determine who gets legal assistance not the individual’s social status?
Isn’t this a form of judicial bigotry and legal hypocrisy when one set of “rules” applies to one group but not another( the legal community) as we have seen, read and heard practiced in our courtrooms nationwide.
I do realize, we live in an imperfect world, and agendas and lobbying groups will always be jockeying for their interests. That’s a given in any democratic nation and/or capitalistic socio-economic structure. But generally speaking, laws constitute the rules that keep a society civil. That is particularly true in democracies where there is a connection between rules and the popular will. However our current situation is in fact a precarious one. Respect for the law, even where it is made by representative bodies, can be quickly eroded by arbitrary and corrupt enforcement. As Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis once said, "if we desire respect for the law, we must first make the law respectable." Sometimes lack of respect can be generated by corrupt unenforcement, such as the one seen with Judge Kent. But within the American system bad elements do come and go. We have seen them before in our history and the ability to repeal them, to purge ourselves of them, is one of the system’s saving graces. In this case it is something else that is undermining respect for the law. It is politically influenced enforcement, the subordinating of our legal codes to whatever "business" is at hand, that is putting the system at risk.
Yet, the truth of the matter is that the work is far from done. We still have many Americans “legally disenfranchised”. It is very clear that this “below the radar” unaccountability of the legal community is another reason many stakeholders are seeking to balance the scales of justice. That’s why the AMA & many think that our country can do better than capping malpractice awards. Therefore, in order to make our country fulfill its equality promise from both perspectives (medically & judicially) we must not only think Tort Reform…we must implement Health Courts in which medico-legal “double standards” are abolished.
Marcos A. Vargas, MSHA, PA-C is a Boston born and Puerto Rican bred individual who has an extensive healthcare industry background, both industry-related as a Pharmacy Technician during his undergraduate years, and industry-specific as a dually N.C.C.P.A. certified Physician Assistant in Surgery and Primary care after graduating from the University of Alabama—Birmingham Physician/Surgeon’s Assistant Program. He has held clinical positions in Cardiothoracic, General Surgery, & Emergency Medicine over the past twenty years. He holds a Master’s in Science Administration from Central Michigan University and a Healthcare Risk Management graduate certificate. He has been retained and consulted regularly by both plaintiff & defense law firms over the past 14 years. During this time, he has served as both a consulting medical reviewer and a PA expert. Marcos has lectured on Clinical Risk Management (PA) issues throughout the years to various Michigan-based PA Training Programs. He has done the same for lay audiences, covering a wide range of “Wellness” topics. He has been a supporter and associate member of numerous professional clinical and non-clinical organizations. Currently he is employed as an orthopedic PA at HMC.
The viewpoint expressed in this article is the opinion of the author and is not necessarily the viewpoint of the owners or employees at Healthcare Staffing Innovations, LLC.
RECOMMEND THIS ARTICLE
You must be logged in
to recommend articles
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
 |
 |
|
 |
 |
 |
|
