Bilbo Hussein Baggins Says:

Did you even read the VA watchdog article? Ethical reporters know that 1) they need to sign in with the VA (which Schultz did not do and 2) they need a consent form signed before an interview (which Schultz did not do)

Did you even read the article we are talking about?

This was a PUBLIC forum.

In a public forum you cannot restrict the freedom of the press. Here, since you like providing links here’s a link to the US Constitution since you obviously haven’t read it in a while.

http://www.constitution.org

Bilbo Hussein Baggins Says:

So perhaps you can tell me why, when told he needed a consent form to interview the patient, Mr. Schultz didn’t ask for a consent form and have his patient sign it right then and there?

A better question would be if a consent form was the only issue, why didn’t Ms Hairston simply provide one, rather than surrounding the reporter with armed guards.

Bilbo Hussein Baggins Says:

So you all choose to believe the word of the reporter over the word of the VA. That’s your right.

No, I choose to believe what’s been reported by both sides, and so far nothing Ms Hairston has said contradicts in any significant manner what Mr Schultz said.

So perhaps you can tell me why, when told he needed a consent form to interview the patient, Mr. Schultz didn’t ask for a consent form and have his patient sign it right then and there?

And what does Jake Trapper getting involved have to do with anything? We all know what a stellar reporter he is and he never blows things out of proportion…right? Trapper is also only reporting what Schultz said happened.

Did you even read the VA watchdog article? Ethical reporters know that 1) they need to sign in with the VA (which Schultz did not do and 2) they need a consent form signed before an interview (which Schultz did not do)

http://www.vawatchdog.org/ 09/ nf09/ nfapr09/ nf041109-3.htm

Bilbo Hussein Baggins Says:

Agreed. I would like to know why the patient didn’t sign a consent form. And why the reporter didn’t go back to get the patient to sign the form to get his flash card back.

Pretty much all we have to go on as to what happened in this incident is what Schultz tells us. He appears to be after his 15 minutes of fame here.

The story is being reported by Jake Tapper, an ABC News’ Senior White House Correspondent. Its not just Mr Schultz promoting this story. And Schultz is a reporter for National Public Radio. He was trying to tell a story that Mr Canady wanted out.

If the issue here was simply a consent form then Ms Hairston would have simply provided one to Mr Canady to sign.

Instead she did not, but threatened to “get ugly” with Mr Schultz, demanding his equipment and refusing to let him leave, effectively kidnapping him by holding him physically (with several armed guards) until he handed over his equipment.

And this was a PUBLIC FORUM that Mr Schultz was interviewing Mr Canady in, something you’d know had you read the story. Mr Schultz simply spoke to Mr Schultz in a public forum provided by the VA and no mention of consent forms was given.

And now she’s released the data after pressure from the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, and no mention of Mr Canady signing any release forms has been mentioned to facilitate this release. Because the VA lawyers pointed out to Ms Hairston and the VA the unconstitutional nature of seizing a reporters equipment in a public venue.

So no, this wasn’t about a consent form, it was about the VA trying to silence criticism in an unconstitutional manner.

The consent form was merely a weak excuse that was abandoned once the lawyers were brought in.

Agreed. I would like to know why the patient didn’t sign a consent form. And why the reporter didn’t go back to get the patient to sign the form to get his flash card back.

Pretty much all we have to go on as to what happened in this incident is what Schultz tells us. He appears to be after his 15 minutes of fame here.

If you comprehended the article correctly, Gloria, “the Witch” did not ask for a consent form when she approached the reporter upon leaving?

And since when do you tell people not to give or ask someone for a phone number?

The only thing the VA could come up with was their consent form policy to keep from being sued.

So this is incorrect:

“On Tuesday, WAMU reporter Eric Schultz attempted to interview Tommie Canady, a veteran from Maryland, about the poor treatment he said he was receiving from the VA. In the middle of the interview at a VA hospital in Washington, DC, a VA communications specialist named Gloria Hairston, “along with two other employees and four armed security guards, stopped Schultz and wouldn’t let him leave until he handed over his [recording] equipment.”

It states right there that it was interupted mid interview. I guess the patient didn’t realize it was an interview because the reporter only had a note pad, recorder and camera.

Why do you insist the VA is right in this? Don’t worry though, that sneaky reporter with all his equipment will manage to fool another patient into giving an interview.

Possibly, once the consent is signed the VA still has to approve it? Or they are only allowed to conduct an interview in the presence of on of the VA overlords.

Since when in America is it a crime to speak of your own personal experiences? Since Bush became president. I guess
Gloria Hairston didn’t get the memo that we have a new President.

Also, to blow a hole in your theory, why was the reporter not allowed to give his phone number to a patient who requested it? Simply because the VA at this facility doesn’t want any of their patients talking to anyone about the shoddy care. Pretty simple.

And this: “VA spokesperson Katie Roberts. “We make every effort to protect the privacy of our patients and to ensure that they are able to make informed decisions about what information they release or discuss with the public while in a VA facility.” And how it may affect their future treatment (that’s my line, not the posts).

This is not painting the entire VA over one incident at this one facility. It is accurately describing the management style and care provided at this single facility.

Bilbo Hussein Baggins Says:

And you know this how?

The ability to read combined with a functioning brain.

It was the excuse.

And you know this how? Did you witness the event? As far as I can tell the only source for what Gloria Hairston said and did was from Schultz. You don’t think it’s possible that Mr. Schultz had an agenda here? If he truly is a reporter, then why didn’t he know about the requirement to check in as a reporter (which he did not do) and to get a consent before an interview (which he did not do).

Bilbo Hussein Baggins Says:

Wow, talk about mob mentality. When did this place become inhabited with a mob that didn’t take into account the reality of a situation. If the VA representative told the reporter that he had to have a consent form signed, then why did the reporter ignore this request? And how did that make the VA the bad guy?

If the patient being interviewed wanted the reporter to interview him, then why didn’t he just sign the consent form?

I am disappointed in the regulars here. Somehow you have allowed the mob mentality to take you over.

Well, perhaps some of the regulars here are disappointed that you actually are gullible enough to believe that a consent form was the issue here.

:|

It was not.

It was the excuse.

They were interrupted mid interview, an interview the reporter started after ignoring a request to get a signed consent form from the patient. Why did he do this? It seems rather simple to me. Perhaps the patient didn’t want to sign the consent form.

Why are you vilifying the VA without having all the facts? Why is it so important to you to make the VA look like the bad guy here? I am sure that in many cases the VA is guilty of doing something wrong, but this is NOT one of those cases.

Read this article and then come back and vilify the VA:

http://www.vawatchdog.org/09/nf09/nfapr09/nf041109-3.htm

BTW, vawatchdog is not a friend of the VA.

This is rediculous. They we’re interupted mid interview. Perhaps the paper hadn’t been signed yet. Why are you siding with the VA? Everyone knows the problems they’ve been having over the years, especially after Bush thrashed it.
What makes you think that they wouldn’t have just taken the signed consent form, if there had been one? Come on, you guys are nit picking. The show of force was meant to intimidate and end the interview. Do you really think a little bit of ink on a piece of paper would have changed that?
Seriously?
That’s a dream world.

For the record, my father, a Korean war vet was treated at the VA hospital in Long Beach for prostate cancer some 15 years ago and he received excellent care, so it’s not like I have a personal bone to pick. It’s just this is the way things have been run since Bush made the VA totally disfuntional.

What I meant by “mob mentality” is that all the posts before yours were pretty much vilifying the VA. No one seemed to be willing to look a little further into the situation before doing that. I blame that partially on TP for leaving out the important points in their article.

If you would bother to read the article about this incident, it clearly says the reporter was asked to get a consent form signed before conducting the interview. But, since most people here want to hang the VA, I’m sure you will think that the VA is lying.

They also told the reporter that he can have his tape back once he gets a consent form signed by the patient.

My question is, if this patient was so gung ho to be interviewed, then why didn’t he sign the consent form?

http://www.rcfp.org/newsitems/index.php?i=10699

The VA is not deciding who can and cannot be interviewed. They only require that a consent form be signed. There are a lot of government laws regarding patient privacy and HIPPA governs them.

I was once interviewed for a news show. The reporter had me sign a consent form. He told me that he could not legally use my interview without my consent. This is pretty much the same thing.

Why is it that people want to hang the VA without taking into account all the facts?