Long gone are the days when Avmed relied on the opinions of treating specialists.
There is probably no better case study available to demonstrate the dire need for a reform of not only the ‘Avmed’ system; but also the reform of the Regulatory system in it’s entirety. The almost unbelievable antics of those involved in the Avmed system provide a clear picture of a failed philosophy, stumbling along it’s merry pathway to self destruction. Reflecting the legal and operational lunacy the current system imposes. The CASA is so deeply mired in the game of avoiding any and all challenges to their ‘above the law’ status that the common sense approach and practical application of ‘safety’ rules have become little more than a self incriminating, iron clad platform from which a successful conviction may be achieved.
Clinton has taken a very sensible stand; happily, he is able to match legal wits with CASA legal and, by making the case public, has avoided the certain fate of those who have won the battle, but lost the war. One of the most heinous results of challenging CASA is the ongoing persecution of those who managed to escape the first skirmish unscathed, only the be marked for later attention. This, standing alone makes for unsafe practices to be masked behind ‘box ticking’ and a reluctance to step up or speak out. For example, a reluctance to mention even any medical condition or even a concern; let alone an operational concern.
CM – “The reason this is important is that although CASA now treats the diagnosis of these specialists as being an objective truth, notwithstanding that it was, as a matter of objective fact, merely the expression of an opinion, CASA now rejects the same specialists’ opinions as to the ongoing success of the procedure those specialists carried out to deal with the diagnosed condition. In short, CASA treats the specialists’ opinions as objective truths when they are against my interests, but rejects the same specialists’ opinions when they are in my interests. This approach is, in my opinion, biased and intellectually dishonest”.
Operational specialist ‘opinion’, much like that of the Rev Forsyth and specialist medical advice and that of the RRAT committee and the AOPA is being dismissed on an industrial scale; put aside as ‘opinion’ and disregarded. The end result is always that no matter how loud, how long; or, even how well informed or supported that ‘opinion’ may be; it will be arbitrarily dismissed. That demonstrable fact; stand alone should provide solid grounds for meaningful reform; alas, it does not. What it does provide is more and more money being demanded to prop up, protect and support a deeply flawed, failed, system. Until CASA itself acknowledges that the entire system is buggered beyond salvation; then nothing will be allowed to change.
CM - "The person who decided to suspend my medical certificate has no specialist qualifications in the matters relevant to the condition with which I was diagnosed nor the risks arising from the treatment of it. His decision letter annexes material that is headed “Relevant Medical Literature”. The letter does not say who decided on the relevance of the material. However, it is manifestly clear that it is not a compendium of all medical literature relevant to my circumstances – a point that CASA’s lawyer and the decision-maker had little choice but to concede during discussions prior to the AAT stay hearing".
The eloquent, intelligent, well supported argument presented by the inestimable McKenzie may well carry the day for him; however, it is a racing certainty that there will not be any internal inquiry leading to any meaningful reform of the way Avmed do business. That is the CASA way and until fundamental reform, across the board, is mandated by the parliament and driven home by a reform director; meaningful change remains as remote as finding intelligent life forms at the bottom of a slurry pit.
Selah.
There is probably no better case study available to demonstrate the dire need for a reform of not only the ‘Avmed’ system; but also the reform of the Regulatory system in it’s entirety. The almost unbelievable antics of those involved in the Avmed system provide a clear picture of a failed philosophy, stumbling along it’s merry pathway to self destruction. Reflecting the legal and operational lunacy the current system imposes. The CASA is so deeply mired in the game of avoiding any and all challenges to their ‘above the law’ status that the common sense approach and practical application of ‘safety’ rules have become little more than a self incriminating, iron clad platform from which a successful conviction may be achieved.
Clinton has taken a very sensible stand; happily, he is able to match legal wits with CASA legal and, by making the case public, has avoided the certain fate of those who have won the battle, but lost the war. One of the most heinous results of challenging CASA is the ongoing persecution of those who managed to escape the first skirmish unscathed, only the be marked for later attention. This, standing alone makes for unsafe practices to be masked behind ‘box ticking’ and a reluctance to step up or speak out. For example, a reluctance to mention even any medical condition or even a concern; let alone an operational concern.
CM – “The reason this is important is that although CASA now treats the diagnosis of these specialists as being an objective truth, notwithstanding that it was, as a matter of objective fact, merely the expression of an opinion, CASA now rejects the same specialists’ opinions as to the ongoing success of the procedure those specialists carried out to deal with the diagnosed condition. In short, CASA treats the specialists’ opinions as objective truths when they are against my interests, but rejects the same specialists’ opinions when they are in my interests. This approach is, in my opinion, biased and intellectually dishonest”.
Operational specialist ‘opinion’, much like that of the Rev Forsyth and specialist medical advice and that of the RRAT committee and the AOPA is being dismissed on an industrial scale; put aside as ‘opinion’ and disregarded. The end result is always that no matter how loud, how long; or, even how well informed or supported that ‘opinion’ may be; it will be arbitrarily dismissed. That demonstrable fact; stand alone should provide solid grounds for meaningful reform; alas, it does not. What it does provide is more and more money being demanded to prop up, protect and support a deeply flawed, failed, system. Until CASA itself acknowledges that the entire system is buggered beyond salvation; then nothing will be allowed to change.
CM - "The person who decided to suspend my medical certificate has no specialist qualifications in the matters relevant to the condition with which I was diagnosed nor the risks arising from the treatment of it. His decision letter annexes material that is headed “Relevant Medical Literature”. The letter does not say who decided on the relevance of the material. However, it is manifestly clear that it is not a compendium of all medical literature relevant to my circumstances – a point that CASA’s lawyer and the decision-maker had little choice but to concede during discussions prior to the AAT stay hearing".
The eloquent, intelligent, well supported argument presented by the inestimable McKenzie may well carry the day for him; however, it is a racing certainty that there will not be any internal inquiry leading to any meaningful reform of the way Avmed do business. That is the CASA way and until fundamental reform, across the board, is mandated by the parliament and driven home by a reform director; meaningful change remains as remote as finding intelligent life forms at the bottom of a slurry pit.
Selah.