|
Post by Roosevelt on Jul 28, 2019 13:21:38 GMT -5
If he is prescribing to an NFL player he absolutely must know what the player’s restrictions are. Says whom? I'm not being snarky, I honestly want to know what law or contract holds a doctor responsible to a private company's internal rules?
I believe this would fall under professional negligence laws. After all, it's not as if this is a new issue.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 28, 2019 13:25:26 GMT -5
Hoping Zeke holds out the first game.
|
|
|
Post by McCherry on Jul 28, 2019 13:54:32 GMT -5
The NFL doesn't reverse suspensions. Tate is out for the first 4 weeks. But the good news is, we don't need another 90 catches in this offense because Tate is not very good. Wrong How many examples are there of the league reversing a suspension in a PED related case? I think the best we can hope for is a reduction, but I can't think of many cases of that.
|
|
|
Post by TCHOF on Jul 28, 2019 13:58:19 GMT -5
How many examples are there of the league reversing a suspension in a PED related case? I think the best we can hope for is a reduction, but I can't think of many cases of that. His suspension will likely stick. You are wrong that Tate isn’t very good.
|
|
|
Post by McCherry on Jul 28, 2019 14:02:55 GMT -5
How many examples are there of the league reversing a suspension in a PED related case? I think the best we can hope for is a reduction, but I can't think of many cases of that. You are wrong that Tate isn’t very good. That was me being facetious... But I'd love to know what the teams plans were for being without him for 4 weeks when they signed him?
|
|
|
Post by TCHOF on Jul 28, 2019 14:23:34 GMT -5
You are wrong that Tate isn’t very good. That was me being facetious... But I'd love to know what the teams plans were for being without him for 4 weeks when they signed him? They didn’t know about this when they signed him in March.
|
|
|
Post by Morehead State on Jul 28, 2019 16:06:47 GMT -5
I doubt that. Tate is the one that signed a contract with the NFL, not his doctor.
I heard on WFAN that there is a phone number every NFL player can call to make sure what he is taking is is OK before he takes it. My bet is Tate gets 4 games. www.nflpa.com/active-players/drug-policies
It may come down to whether or not the doctor had Tate sign an "informed consent" for the medication.
But the doctor is absolutely responsible for knowledge of the composition of the drug/s he's prescribing - it's chemical make-up, it's affects, side-affects, and dosage.
Every doctor knows their patient athletes must avoid certain chemicals. Sounds to me like this doctor was negligent.
No way that would ever hold up in court. A doctor isn't there to know every restriction from every employer.
He's there for the patient's health, not their professional viability.
|
|
|
Post by Delicreep on Jul 28, 2019 16:13:17 GMT -5
Says whom? I'm not being snarky, I honestly want to know what law or contract holds a doctor responsible to a private company's internal rules?
I believe this would fall under professional negligence laws. After all, it's not as if this is a new issue.
While I agree with your sentiment here, there probably are items on that list that a Dr. would have no idea are banned...say a masking agent and not banned substance. In the end, the process put's the burden on the player - he was responsible to check on what he is prescribed. He didn't.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 28, 2019 16:53:43 GMT -5
The NFL doesn't reverse suspensions. Tate is out for the first 4 weeks. But the good news is, we don't need another 90 catches in this offense because Tate is not very good. im not seeing the silver lining you are, then again i am a known pessimist
|
|
coughlinscorner
Special Teams
Gooble Gobble We Accept Her One of Us
Posts: 854
|
Post by coughlinscorner on Jul 28, 2019 16:55:33 GMT -5
How many examples are there of the league reversing a suspension in a PED related case? I think the best we can hope for is a reduction, but I can't think of many cases of that. Since 2010, on Goodell’s watch, two indefinite suspensions have been overruled, a pair of one-game bans have been eliminated, two multi-game suspensions have been reduced, and all the players disciplined in the Bountygate scandal were able to overturn their suspensions.
|
|
|
Post by McCherry on Jul 28, 2019 17:27:24 GMT -5
How many examples are there of the league reversing a suspension in a PED related case? I think the best we can hope for is a reduction, but I can't think of many cases of that. Since 2010, on Goodell’s watch, two indefinite suspensions have been overruled, a pair of one-game bans have been eliminated, two multi-game suspensions have been reduced, and all the players disciplined in the Bountygate scandal were able to overturn their suspensions. Good research. And those numbers don't bode well for Tate.
|
|
|
Post by IrishMike on Jul 28, 2019 17:44:55 GMT -5
I'll wait to see our lineup week 1 before freaking out. Life's short gentlemen, sit back and relax a bit.
|
|
|
Post by spaceweather on Jul 28, 2019 18:17:19 GMT -5
Per @adamschefter Giants’ WR Golden Tate is appealing a four-game suspension for violating the NFL’s Performance Enhacing Substance policy and believes he has legitimate case, league sources tell ESPN. Some much for wait and see how the appeal process turns out,..........according to this board he is guilty and should be cut! It's Eli's fault ,Thanks alot ELI!!!Hey at least Eli has another excuse, "BUT HE HAD NO WRs!" Eli 2020 baby!
|
|
|
Post by spaceweather on Jul 28, 2019 18:18:38 GMT -5
I for one am really thankful our Training Camp has had zero distractions and high character guys. #Culture
|
|
|
Post by Morehead State on Jul 28, 2019 18:24:23 GMT -5
No way that would ever hold up in court. A doctor isn't there to know every restriction from every employer.
He's there for the patient's health, not their professional viability.
I would normally agree with you here but when my patient is a Professional athlete it might be a little different. It's not. That is the responsibility of the patient. It's great when a doctor can advise the patient given his profession, but it's hardly his legal responsibility.
There is nothing in the Hippocratic oath that provides for understanding NFL rules.
|
|
|
Post by Morehead State on Jul 28, 2019 18:27:14 GMT -5
Says whom? I'm not being snarky, I honestly want to know what law or contract holds a doctor responsible to a private company's internal rules?
I believe this would fall under professional negligence laws. After all, it's not as if this is a new issue.
What if a doctor doesn't follow football? He is legally responsible to understand NFL rules regarding banned substances?
I'm sorry but that is ridiculous. Doctors are required to focus on the health of their patients, not the rules of their patient's employers. That would be an impossible task. They aren't even required to know where a patient works.
|
|
|
Post by Roosevelt on Jul 28, 2019 19:14:41 GMT -5
It may come down to whether or not the doctor had Tate sign an "informed consent" for the medication.
But the doctor is absolutely responsible for knowledge of the composition of the drug/s he's prescribing - it's chemical make-up, it's affects, side-affects, and dosage.
Every doctor knows their patient athletes must avoid certain chemicals. Sounds to me like this doctor was negligent.
No way that would ever hold up in court. A doctor isn't there to know every restriction from every employer.
He's there for the patient's health, not their professional viability.
That certainly seems to be the case in this instance, unless of course the doctor advised Tate and had him sign an informed consent.
Doctors are expected exercise caution when prescribing medications to athletes, and be mindful of PED's. There is no excuse for a doctor to prescribe a banned substance in today's day and age.
|
|
|
Post by GameTime on Jul 28, 2019 19:18:50 GMT -5
No way that would ever hold up in court. A doctor isn't there to know every restriction from every employer.
He's there for the patient's health, not their professional viability.
That certainly seems to be the case in this instance, unless of course the doctor advised Tate and had him sign an informed consent.
Doctors are expected exercise caution when prescribing medications to athletes, and be mindful of PED's. There is no excuse for a doctor to prescribe a banned substance in today's day and age.
I tend to agree with that even of the doctor is not responsible. With that said Tate and every other player has to do their own research or have it done prior to any weird meds or treatments
|
|
|
Post by Roosevelt on Jul 28, 2019 19:23:19 GMT -5
I believe this would fall under professional negligence laws. After all, it's not as if this is a new issue.
What if a doctor doesn't follow football? He is legally responsible to understand NFL rules regarding banned substances?
I'm sorry but that is ridiculous. Doctors are required to focus on the health of their patients, not the rules of their patient's employers. That would be an impossible task. They aren't even required to know where a patient works.
If the physician is unaware of the player's medical condition, or the substances he's barred from taking, then he is not qualified to treat him.
|
|
|
Post by Delicreep on Jul 28, 2019 19:23:54 GMT -5
No way that would ever hold up in court. A doctor isn't there to know every restriction from every employer.
He's there for the patient's health, not their professional viability.
That certainly seems to be the case in this instance, unless of course the doctor advised Tate and had him sign an informed consent.
Doctors are expected exercise caution when prescribing medications to athletes, and be mindful of PED's. There is no excuse for a doctor to prescribe a banned substance in today's day and age. You know...I was thinking about your position. I have a primary Dr, but he surely doesn't know what I do for a living, where I live...really anything about me (modesty aside, I am remarkably healthy, knock on wood). When I do see him, it's wait, wait, wait, rushed in rushed out. Wanna but that he was little more than a number in that fertility clinic?
|
|
|
Post by Roosevelt on Jul 28, 2019 19:25:09 GMT -5
That certainly seems to be the case in this instance, unless of course the doctor advised Tate and had him sign an informed consent.
Doctors are expected exercise caution when prescribing medications to athletes, and be mindful of PED's. There is no excuse for a doctor to prescribe a banned substance in today's day and age.
I tend to agree with that even of the doctor is not responsible. With that said Tate and every other player has to do their own research or have it done prior to any weird meds or treatments
I'm not trying to say Tate has no responsibility. I'm only pointing out the doctor's responsibility as a professional.
|
|
|
Post by Roosevelt on Jul 28, 2019 19:28:31 GMT -5
That certainly seems to be the case in this instance, unless of course the doctor advised Tate and had him sign an informed consent.
Doctors are expected exercise caution when prescribing medications to athletes, and be mindful of PED's. There is no excuse for a doctor to prescribe a banned substance in today's day and age. You know...I was thinking about your position. I have a primary Dr, but he surely doesn't know what I do for a living, where I live...really anything about me (modesty aside, I am remarkably healthy, knock on wood). When I do see him, it's wait, wait, wait, rushed in rushed out. Wanna but that he was little more than a number in that fertility clinic? lol. I'd say there's no question there are a lot problems in medicine.
And while this has nothing to do with the discussion; I find HIPAA violations most every time I step foot in a doctor's office.
|
|
|
Post by Roosevelt on Jul 28, 2019 19:32:38 GMT -5
That certainly seems to be the case in this instance, unless of course the doctor advised Tate and had him sign an informed consent.
Doctors are expected exercise caution when prescribing medications to athletes, and be mindful of PED's. There is no excuse for a doctor to prescribe a banned substance in today's day and age. You know...I was thinking about your position. I have a primary Dr, but he surely doesn't know what I do for a living, where I live...really anything about me (modesty aside, I am remarkably healthy, knock on wood). When I do see him, it's wait, wait, wait, rushed in rushed out. Wanna but that he was little more than a number in that fertility clinic?
What about medications that say "may cause drowsiness"? Let's say you are a high voltage worker. Don't you think you and your doctor should discuss the affects of the medication?
|
|
|
Post by Kruunch on Jul 28, 2019 19:58:23 GMT -5
I tend to agree with that even of the doctor is not responsible. With that said Tate and every other player has to do their own research or have it done prior to any weird meds or treatments
I'm not trying to say Tate has no responsibility. I'm only pointing out the doctor's responsibility as a professional.
A doctors responsibility is to prescribe the correct medicine for what ills you. Be it a cold or something as in Tates case a fertility prescription. The doctor has no responsibility as to what the NFL can and can not take for its players. That’s on Tate since he’s employed by an NFL team and has to abide by the rules. Before he took the medicine he should have contacted the league and said is it allowed? Then all of this would not have happened, want to play in the NFL you have to abide by these rules. They love the checks and the praise they get playing a game, but can’t understand the rules that apply it. Point is as an adult you have to make decisions on a daily basis, and you have to live with the consequences. So far Tate the new kid around here is already not off to a good start.
|
|
|
Post by Roosevelt on Jul 28, 2019 20:24:42 GMT -5
I'm not trying to say Tate has no responsibility. I'm only pointing out the doctor's responsibility as a professional.
A doctors responsibility is to prescribe the correct medicine for what ills you. Be it a cold or something as in Tates case a fertility prescription. The doctor has no responsibility as to what the NFL can and can not take for its players. That’s on Tate since he’s employed by an NFL team and has to abide by the rules. Before he took the medicine he should have contacted the league and said is it allowed? Then all of this would not have happened, want to play in the NFL you have to abide by these rules. They love the checks and the praise they get playing a game, but can’t understand the rules that apply it. Point is as an adult you have to make decisions on a daily basis, and you have to live with the consequences. So far Tate the new kid around here is already not off to a good start.
The doctor has a responsibility to know and disclose what's in the medication. He's responsible for the effects and side effects of the drug he's prescribing or has administered.
|
|
|
Post by TCHOF on Jul 28, 2019 20:33:52 GMT -5
This entire discussion presumes that Tate is telling the truth ... and I’m not convinced of that
|
|
|
Post by Morehead State on Jul 28, 2019 20:36:57 GMT -5
A doctors responsibility is to prescribe the correct medicine for what ills you. Be it a cold or something as in Tates case a fertility prescription. The doctor has no responsibility as to what the NFL can and can not take for its players. That’s on Tate since he’s employed by an NFL team and has to abide by the rules. Before he took the medicine he should have contacted the league and said is it allowed? Then all of this would not have happened, want to play in the NFL you have to abide by these rules. They love the checks and the praise they get playing a game, but can’t understand the rules that apply it. Point is as an adult you have to make decisions on a daily basis, and you have to live with the consequences. So far Tate the new kid around here is already not off to a good start.
The doctor has a responsibility to know and disclose what's in the medication. He's responsible for the effects and side effects of the drug he's prescribing or has administered.
I guess. No doctor has told me what's in everything he's prescribed to me. The pharmacist is responsible to check any possible reactions with other drugs. Getting in trouble with the NFL is not a side effect.
You seem to be suggesting that a doctor is responsible to know the substance rules in the NFL. I think that's a bridge too far.
|
|
|
Post by Roosevelt on Jul 28, 2019 20:37:09 GMT -5
A doctors responsibility is to prescribe the correct medicine for what ills you.
Wrong. The doctor is charged with a responsibility of choosing the correct medication for his patient.
Let's say the patient is a pilot. Is your argument the doctor should disregard his occupation when prescribing or administering medication?
|
|
|
Post by Morehead State on Jul 28, 2019 20:39:49 GMT -5
A doctors responsibility is to prescribe the correct medicine for what ills you.
Wrong. The doctor is charged with a responsibility of choosing the correct medication for his patient.
Let's say the patient is a pilot. Is your argument the doctor should disregard his occupation when prescribing or administering medication?
He's responsible to inform the patient of side effects. Not whether it violates rules collectively bargained by the NFL and the NFLPA.
|
|
|
Post by Roosevelt on Jul 28, 2019 20:52:09 GMT -5
The doctor has a responsibility to know and disclose what's in the medication. He's responsible for the effects and side effects of the drug he's prescribing or has administered.
I guess. No doctor has told me what's in everything he's prescribed to me. The pharmacist is responsible to check any possible side effects or reactions with other drugs.
You seem to be suggesting that a doctor is responsible to know the substance rules in the NFL. I think that's a bridge too far.
In order to prescribe medication; the doctor must know the patient's medical history which always includes their occupation.
Once a doctor becomes aware their patient is a pro athlete; they now have an obligation to learn about PED's, and their effects on their patient. They should treat that information the same way they would if they learned this person has an allergy.
In this day in age, disclosure of the compounds in drugs prescribed under such conditions is expected.
|
|