You seem to have a basic misconception of what constitutes Medical Mal-Practice. The "standard of care" is not the sole determinant of what is Mal-Practice. There are 4 Specific elements that have to be proven for a judgement of Mal-Practice. Each of those 4 elements are proven or dis proven "to a Jury's satisfaction" by a battle of "expert witnesses. A Jury is also known as the "Trier of the fact(s)" and it is "facts" that determine what constitutes Mal-Practice.
In the situation of C-19 Vaccines, the question in a courtroom Case is not "whether the Physician is guilty of Mal-Practice?" But rather "did the Physician violate a Criminal Statute?"
There are specific steps and procedures a Physician or a hospital must follow in the situation of an EUA (Emergency Use Authorization) medication/vaccine or Medical procedure.
All C-19 Vaccines were EUA medications/vaccines.
The various "laws" passed by Congress that said they gave Physicians, Hospitals and Drug Companies "absolute liability protection" in the case of C-19 Vaccines only gave liability protection WHEN certain, specific, stated in law, procedures were strictly followed. These certain, specific, stated in law procedures are set out in International Criminal Law recognized by ALL Civilized Nations including nations such as Russia, Germany, France, Italy, and every nation that came out of a former British colony such as the US, Canada, Australia, India etc.
In many of those above named countries, especially those that came out of a former British colony, there is a basic premise in Law that is stated thusly, "Ignorance of the Law is no excuse." This means that no one, in our current discussion including Physicians, Hospital Administrators, and Drug company officers etc can defend themselves by attempting to invoke a Law that says those people are given "absolute liability protection" UNLESS those same people have followed, completely, each step or procedure outlined in the International Criminal Law their country signed on too.
Every Physician, Hospital Administrator and most other Health Care Professionals were taught in their training that BEFORE they preformed certain procedures and treatments on a patient or had those same procedures and treatment preformed in their hospital, or prescribed or administered certain drugs, something called "Informed Consent" must be obtained in writing, signed and dated by both the patient and the Health Care Provider obtaining that Informed Consent and placed in that patient's permanent record.
In the case of an EUA drug such as a C-19 "vaccine" only available to the public under EUA, the Informed Consent is, under International law, a much stricter level of Informed Consent.
Specifically, the Informed Consent for the EUA C-19 "vaccine" Administration, in order to allow a Physician, hospital etc to be covered by the US Laws that claimed to give those same people and hospitals "liability coverage" or "liability protection" The Level of Informed Consent had to specifically State the following:
1. This is an experimental drug or procedure.
2. This drug or procedure is still in trails, (Phase II Trials) and the risks and benefits of this drug or procedure, especially the long term risks are not known.
3. Because of #2 above I can not tell you what the risks of taking the drug and its benefits are or if this is and experimental procedure I can not tell you what the risks and benefits of having this procedure are.
4. Because this drug or procedure is experimental, no one can force (i.e. mandate) that you take the drug or have this procedure done.
5. I have to tell you that it is possible that if you take this experimental drug or have this experimental procedure, you could end up disabled or die.
6. By signing and dating this Informed Consent Form you are agreeing to take this experimental drug or procedure and realize that you are doing this on your own volition.
7. Then it is signed and dated by both you and me as the Health Care Provider.
Failure to do what is stated above by the Physician, Hospital or other Health Care Provider is "prima facie" i.e. "on it's face" proof of violation of a Criminal Statute.
The essentially only defense a Physician, Hospital etc has to prevent prosecution under this international Law is to show the above properly written and signed informed consent Document.
If found guilty of violation of this International Law, there are only 2 penalties a Physician, Hospital Administrator etc can have are; a) death penalty or b) life in prison with no possibility of Parole, only if that Physician, Hospital Administrator ect becomes "states evidence" and testifies against other Physicians., Hospital Administrators etc.
IF this International Law is ever put into practice in the US there could be thousands of Physicians, Hospital Administrators etc who lose life or freedom.
Perhaps that last statement above was the "real reason" this entire Covid 19 fiasco was planned to happen?! After all, Fauci and Bill Gates both have proven actions that show them to be eugenists-people wanting the population of the earth markedly reduced.
While "standard of care" is not the only measure of malpractice, it is the wall which is hardest to cross when mounting a malpractice lawsuit. I'm familiar with this in SSRI/psych drug lawsuits, and I've heard of others (hair loss or acne pill?). Impossible to sue, for example, over statin, PPI or heart drug damages because of "standard of care," and those damned algorithms which proclaim a doctor **should** prescribe a harmful drug. "Standard of Care" is an umbrella which catches and repels a lot of potential medical lawsuits.
Criminal is another matter (which is why CHD is being so clever on this one).
And the EUA does not cover DOD "emergency measures" i.e. biowarfare - read some Katherine Watt or Sasha Latypova. There is no liability for the shots. Even if you don't consider the mysterious contracts between governments and pharma.
And if Katherine and Sasha are right, even if there is a successful class action of all the harmed against all the pharmas - they will just file bankruptcy, go down, re-org, re-brand, and do it again under the auspices of a new emergency. Or just sneak mRNA into everything in our environment. By the time that becomes a problem, the people who started it will be passing their yachts on to their heirs.
Australia, in particular, somehow phrased it (I am obviously not a lawyer) so that doctors couldn't be sued over the shots, either. And while there were no official mandates (hunh) - they rigged the insurance & health & Safety regs so that an "unvaccinated workplace is a dangerous one." THAT's where most of our mandates came from. (I'm in Queensland, it may be different in other states, because these regs were passed at state, not federal level, so that our slimy PM could say, "I didn't do it!")
Sorry, rant mode off. Keep working it, Bitterroot. We need brains like yours to weasel through their words.
This lawsuit is clever in that it doesn't go after "malpractice."
Malpractice is nearly impossible to prove if the "standard of care" (all the other doc's are doing it!) is followed.
JC,
You seem to have a basic misconception of what constitutes Medical Mal-Practice. The "standard of care" is not the sole determinant of what is Mal-Practice. There are 4 Specific elements that have to be proven for a judgement of Mal-Practice. Each of those 4 elements are proven or dis proven "to a Jury's satisfaction" by a battle of "expert witnesses. A Jury is also known as the "Trier of the fact(s)" and it is "facts" that determine what constitutes Mal-Practice.
In the situation of C-19 Vaccines, the question in a courtroom Case is not "whether the Physician is guilty of Mal-Practice?" But rather "did the Physician violate a Criminal Statute?"
There are specific steps and procedures a Physician or a hospital must follow in the situation of an EUA (Emergency Use Authorization) medication/vaccine or Medical procedure.
All C-19 Vaccines were EUA medications/vaccines.
The various "laws" passed by Congress that said they gave Physicians, Hospitals and Drug Companies "absolute liability protection" in the case of C-19 Vaccines only gave liability protection WHEN certain, specific, stated in law, procedures were strictly followed. These certain, specific, stated in law procedures are set out in International Criminal Law recognized by ALL Civilized Nations including nations such as Russia, Germany, France, Italy, and every nation that came out of a former British colony such as the US, Canada, Australia, India etc.
In many of those above named countries, especially those that came out of a former British colony, there is a basic premise in Law that is stated thusly, "Ignorance of the Law is no excuse." This means that no one, in our current discussion including Physicians, Hospital Administrators, and Drug company officers etc can defend themselves by attempting to invoke a Law that says those people are given "absolute liability protection" UNLESS those same people have followed, completely, each step or procedure outlined in the International Criminal Law their country signed on too.
Every Physician, Hospital Administrator and most other Health Care Professionals were taught in their training that BEFORE they preformed certain procedures and treatments on a patient or had those same procedures and treatment preformed in their hospital, or prescribed or administered certain drugs, something called "Informed Consent" must be obtained in writing, signed and dated by both the patient and the Health Care Provider obtaining that Informed Consent and placed in that patient's permanent record.
In the case of an EUA drug such as a C-19 "vaccine" only available to the public under EUA, the Informed Consent is, under International law, a much stricter level of Informed Consent.
Specifically, the Informed Consent for the EUA C-19 "vaccine" Administration, in order to allow a Physician, hospital etc to be covered by the US Laws that claimed to give those same people and hospitals "liability coverage" or "liability protection" The Level of Informed Consent had to specifically State the following:
1. This is an experimental drug or procedure.
2. This drug or procedure is still in trails, (Phase II Trials) and the risks and benefits of this drug or procedure, especially the long term risks are not known.
3. Because of #2 above I can not tell you what the risks of taking the drug and its benefits are or if this is and experimental procedure I can not tell you what the risks and benefits of having this procedure are.
4. Because this drug or procedure is experimental, no one can force (i.e. mandate) that you take the drug or have this procedure done.
5. I have to tell you that it is possible that if you take this experimental drug or have this experimental procedure, you could end up disabled or die.
6. By signing and dating this Informed Consent Form you are agreeing to take this experimental drug or procedure and realize that you are doing this on your own volition.
7. Then it is signed and dated by both you and me as the Health Care Provider.
Failure to do what is stated above by the Physician, Hospital or other Health Care Provider is "prima facie" i.e. "on it's face" proof of violation of a Criminal Statute.
The essentially only defense a Physician, Hospital etc has to prevent prosecution under this international Law is to show the above properly written and signed informed consent Document.
If found guilty of violation of this International Law, there are only 2 penalties a Physician, Hospital Administrator etc can have are; a) death penalty or b) life in prison with no possibility of Parole, only if that Physician, Hospital Administrator ect becomes "states evidence" and testifies against other Physicians., Hospital Administrators etc.
IF this International Law is ever put into practice in the US there could be thousands of Physicians, Hospital Administrators etc who lose life or freedom.
Perhaps that last statement above was the "real reason" this entire Covid 19 fiasco was planned to happen?! After all, Fauci and Bill Gates both have proven actions that show them to be eugenists-people wanting the population of the earth markedly reduced.
While "standard of care" is not the only measure of malpractice, it is the wall which is hardest to cross when mounting a malpractice lawsuit. I'm familiar with this in SSRI/psych drug lawsuits, and I've heard of others (hair loss or acne pill?). Impossible to sue, for example, over statin, PPI or heart drug damages because of "standard of care," and those damned algorithms which proclaim a doctor **should** prescribe a harmful drug. "Standard of Care" is an umbrella which catches and repels a lot of potential medical lawsuits.
Criminal is another matter (which is why CHD is being so clever on this one).
And the EUA does not cover DOD "emergency measures" i.e. biowarfare - read some Katherine Watt or Sasha Latypova. There is no liability for the shots. Even if you don't consider the mysterious contracts between governments and pharma.
And if Katherine and Sasha are right, even if there is a successful class action of all the harmed against all the pharmas - they will just file bankruptcy, go down, re-org, re-brand, and do it again under the auspices of a new emergency. Or just sneak mRNA into everything in our environment. By the time that becomes a problem, the people who started it will be passing their yachts on to their heirs.
Australia, in particular, somehow phrased it (I am obviously not a lawyer) so that doctors couldn't be sued over the shots, either. And while there were no official mandates (hunh) - they rigged the insurance & health & Safety regs so that an "unvaccinated workplace is a dangerous one." THAT's where most of our mandates came from. (I'm in Queensland, it may be different in other states, because these regs were passed at state, not federal level, so that our slimy PM could say, "I didn't do it!")
Sorry, rant mode off. Keep working it, Bitterroot. We need brains like yours to weasel through their words.
Even informed consents I have signed for procedures have only been signed by me. Never by the attending doctor.