Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site bmcg.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!ittatc!dcdwest!sdcsvax!bmcg!bobn
From: bobn@bmcg.UUCP (Bob Nebert)
Newsgroups: net.med,net.legal
Subject: Re: legal definition of practice of medicine --SO WHAT??--
Message-ID: <1936@bmcg.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 14-Oct-85 13:10:26 EDT
Article-I.D.: bmcg.1936
Posted: Mon Oct 14 13:10:26 1985
Date-Received: Tue, 15-Oct-85 08:08:16 EDT
References: <10573@ucbvax.ARPA> <1926@bmcg.UUCP> <1349@ihlpg.UUCP>
Organization: Burroughs Corp. ASG, San Diego, CA.
Lines: 22
Xref: linus net.med:2391 net.legal:2094

> > Why do you -as a patient- have to be required to seek services from
> > a doctor who had to get licensed by the state.
> > 
> > If I wanted to entrust my broken arm to you, and you were willing
> > to accept the job of fixing it but didn't have a piece of paper,
> > so what? If I have faith in you why can't I let you do it? If you
> > screw it up its my fault for going to you and not a licensed doctor
> > but why don't I have the liberty to pick whomever I wish??
> -----
> A long debate on just this point has been raging in net.politics.theory
> for some time, where libertarians have been presenting this point
> of view, and others have rebutted it.  I hope the above poster will
> join that discussion, rather than starting a new one in net.med.
> This issue is much more political than medical.  Lets try to keep
> politics out of net.med.
> -- 
> Bill Tanenbaum - AT&T Bell Labs - Naperville IL  ihnp4!ihlpg!tan

I am the original poster and I don't subscribe to net.politics.theory.
Thank you for pointing out where to go (did I phrase that right?).
I think it is a interesting discussion and I'll pick it up in the
other group. Thanks---