This is my surprised face.
...although it isn’t, because I am not surprised.
I recently listened to hours and hours of Supreme Court decisions on segregation at lunch counters from the 1950s and 1960s.
1963: A Year in Graphical and Statistical Prose is a project where each chapter is a month, and highlights from that month are revisited with a data or graphical perspective.
The month of May was pivotal in deciding a handful of cases and I presented them in an article,
I mention this because it is important to understand how the Supreme Court operates and why allowing provisions to be stripped away is dangerous.
The constitution never fully empowered The 14th Amendment to specifically address discrimination of private enterprise but instead relied on a weird tea brewed from the Commerce Clause, Brown v Board of Education and deciphering what is and isn’t a state right in regard to private enterprise. The final rulings of the Supreme Court reversed a host of earlier lower court decisions on a single day in May 1963.
Historically it would seem appropriate to hold the sit-in convictions as a violation of the equal protection clause (part of the Fourteenth Amendment) which took effect in 1868. Drafters of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 actually relied on Congress’ Commerce Power falling short of liberating Congress’ authority to enforce provisions of the Fourteenth Amendment—a strong statement that would have summarily established sit-in prosecutions as a violation of rights under the Constitution.
What you are reading is that the Fourteenth Amendment was hardly the reason “equal protection of the laws” appeared to be recognized. So yes, reproductive rights are not specifically delineated in the constitution but neither was segregation and a host of other rights at risk of being violated under the constitution.
I know you didn’t ask but I always thought these discussions should not be political, but medical. Medical malpractice isn’t going to disappear because of a religious belief or neglect of stare decisis. Healthcare providers are better suited to discuss limits of viability and standards of risk and harms preceding, during and post pregnancy. The practice of medicine is going to have to evolve in a way that is not able to prioritize maternal health or risk.
How does that work?
THE HIPPOCRATIC OATH: MODERN VERSION
I swear to fulfill, to the best of my ability and judgment, this covenant:
I will respect the hard-won scientific gains of those physicians in whose steps I walk, and gladly share such knowledge as is mine with those who are to follow.
I will apply, for the benefit of the sick, all measures [that] are required, avoiding those twin traps of overtreatment and therapeutic nihilism.
I will remember that there is art to medicine as well as science, and that warmth, sympathy, and understanding may outweigh the surgeon's knife or the chemist's drug.
I will not be ashamed to say "I know not," nor will I fail to call in my colleagues when the skills of another are needed for a patient's recovery.
I will respect the privacy of my patients, for their problems are not disclosed to me that the world may know. Most especially must I tread with care in matters of life and death. If it is given me to save a life, all thanks. But it may also be within my power to take a life; this awesome responsibility must be faced with great humbleness and awareness of my own frailty. Above all, I must not play at God.
I will remember that I do not treat a fever chart, a cancerous growth, but a sick human being, whose illness may affect the person's family and economic stability. My responsibility includes these related problems, if I am to care adequately for the sick.
I will prevent disease whenever I can, for prevention is preferable to cure.
I will remember that I remain a member of society, with special obligations to all my fellow human beings, those sound of mind and body as well as the infirm.
If I do not violate this oath, may I enjoy life and art, respected while I live and remembered with affection thereafter. May I always act so as to preserve the finest traditions of my calling and may I long experience the joy of healing those who seek my help.
Written in 1964 by Louis Lasagna, Academic Dean of the School of Medicine at Tufts University, and used in many medical schools today.
Reviewing the American Board of Professional Liability Attorneys and how malpractice is defined:
To be considered medical malpractice under the law, the claim must have the following characteristics:
A violation of the standard of care - The law acknowledges that there are certain medical standards that are recognized by the profession as being acceptable medical treatment by reasonably prudent health care professionals under like or similar circumstances. This is known as the standard of care. A patient has the right to expect that health care professionals will deliver care that is consistent with these standards. If it is determined that the standard of care has not been met, then negligence may be established.
An injury was caused by the negligence - For a medical malpractice claim to be valid, it is not sufficient that a health care professional simply violated the standard of care. The patient must also prove he or she sustained an injury that would not have occurred in the absence of negligence. An unfavorable outcome by itself is not malpractice. The patient must prove that the negligence caused the injury. If there is an injury without negligence or negligence that did not cause an injury, there is no case.
The injury resulted in significant damages - Medical malpractice lawsuits are extremely expensive to litigate, frequently requiring testimony of numerous medical experts and countless hours of deposition testimony. For a case to be viable, the patient must show that significant damages resulted from an injury received due to the medical negligence. If the damages are small, the cost of pursuing the case might be greater than the eventual recovery. To pursue a medical malpractice claim, the patient must show that the injury resulted in disability, loss of income, unusual pain, suffering and hardship, or significant past and future medical bills.
As a brown woman that writes about healthcare, policy, and data I needed to say something. It seemed weird to pretend things were as they were or as they should be.
I am fortunate that I get to begin most days with a few hours of running on trails. To balance my work responsibilities many of you know I am an avid podcast listener.
Thankfully a welcome distraction on Minds Behind Maps listening to Barbara Ryan discuss how Landsat became freely and openly available was next in the queue.
As an autodidact, my experience has been a technical immersive experience and much of the history I have had to augment with books and podcasts. This was one of my favorite episodes not only because I always appreciate learning new information but to be introduced to an important woman in the space was what I needed.
Spend any time as an executive in any field you recognize that there are differences between experiences shared by male colleagues and those of female colleagues. It is unspoken but when we gather we definitely give it voice. This isn’t a complaint, simply an observation.
I wrote this short newsletter today to check on you. I wanted to let you know you are seen and I was thinking of all of you.
The geospatial community reminds me of the ultra-running community.
Most of the geospatial community has been welcoming and even if you aren’t “elite” there is much you can contribute.
