Return to index: [Subject] [Thread] [Date] [Author]

Re: California PE Vs SE requirements

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Good point, I will have to choose my analogies better in the future.
Randy

----- Original Message -----
From: "Roger Turk" <73527.1356(--nospam--at)compuserve.com>
To: <seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org>
Sent: Tuesday, April 17, 2001 9:19 AM
Subject: Re: California PE Vs SE requirements


> Randy Vogelgesang wrote:
>
> . > Can you imagine a doctor having to get a second opinion from the
orderly
> . > at the hospital, and then, having to debate the treatment with him?
>
> Unfortunately, this is the norm for doctors nowadays.  But it is not with
the
> orderly at the hospital, but with the probably less trained and
experienced
> "medical evaluation technician" (compared to the orderly) at the
Denialcare
> HMO who is provided only with a rubber stamp that says, "Proposed
treatment
> is not approved without additional information."  After the doctor
provides
> "additional information," and after debating the treatment thru many phone
> calls with the "technician," he/she *may* be transferred to a physician
who
> understands the medical problem.
>
> A. Roger Turk, P.E.(Structural)
> Tucson, Arizona



* 
*   This email was sent to you via Structural Engineers 
*   Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) server. To 
*   subscribe (no fee) or UnSubscribe, please go to:
*
*   http://www.seaint.org/sealist1.asp
*
*   Questions to seaint-ad(--nospam--at)seaint.org. Remember, any email you 
*   send to the list is public domain and may be re-posted 
*   without your permission. Make sure you visit our web 
*   site at: http://www.seaint.org