This is somewhat breathtaking …
Judge Orie Melvin dissented from an en banc Superior Court decision in Thierfelder v. Wolfert, 978 A.2d 361 (Pa. Super. May 19, 2009), which held that when a physician is providing specific treatment for psychological problems, and has a sexual relationship with the patient, if that sexual relationship directly causes the patient’s psychological/emotional symptoms to worsen, that patient has potentially stated a cognizable cause of action for malpractice. Judge Orie Melvin joined a dissenting opinion authored by Judge Lally-Green stating that a consensual, non-medical sexual affair between doctor and patient does not constitute the rendering of a medical skill associated with specialized training.
Judge Orie Melvin joined the dissenters in saying that the majority was mistaken in holding that a physician, whether a specialist or not, has a duty to refrain from a sexual affair with his patient even in the circumstances where the physician is treating the patient for an emotional condition or psychological problems and the patient alleges that the affair worsened the psychological problem.
This is a breathtaking position for Judge Orie Melvin and the other two dissenters to take given that the doctor in question allegedly had a consensual sexual relationship with his patient for one year while she was his patient and being treated by him for anxiety and depression.
Is this the kind of Judge that women of Pennsylvania want on the court?
Physicians have no duty to refrain from sexual affairs even when they will have a detrimental impact? Huh? WTF? Oh my God? All of those things to the nth degree!
And this woman is running for the Highest Court in the Commonwealth?
Case is attached below.
More?
AFA of PA questionairre. Jack Panella refrains from pandering as is fitting for an impartial judge. Joan spews it all out.
************************************************
For 18+ years, snowflakes, social justice warriors, and the politically correct have built this blog. Follow us on Twitter @Pghlesbian24
We need your ongoing support to maintain this archive and continue the work. Please consider becoming a patron of this blog with a recurring monthly donation or make a one-time donation.
Venmo @PghLesbian CashApp $PghLesbian
This post and/or others may contain affiliate links. Your purchase through these links support our work. You are under no obligation to make a purchase.
Jack Panella refrains from pandering as in fitting for an impartial judge???
So a vote for Jack is just one against Joan. I'd rather know what someones thinking then being panderered , and if i'm to vote for someone then answer up
Jack Panella refrains from pandering as in fitting for an impartial judge???
So a vote for Jack is just one against Joan. I'd rather know what someones thinking then being panderered , and if i'm to vote for someone then answer up
Ummm. I have posted plenty of information on Panella. Just use the search box.
Ummm. I have posted plenty of information on Panella. Just use the search box.
a search doesn't find anything more then 2 post with name dropping and stating that Jack Panella is running for Supreme Court
a search doesn't find anything more then 2 post with name dropping and stating that Jack Panella is running for Supreme Court
Ok. Here's the link to Panella's Stonewall questionairre. http://stonewalldemocrats.org/steel-city/node/558
I hope that gives you adequate information Thanks for pointing that out.
Ok. Here's the link to Panella's Stonewall questionairre. http://stonewalldemocrats.org/steel-city/node/558
I hope that gives you adequate information Thanks for pointing that out.
Thanks That link provided a little more insight as to what Jack Panella's about
Thanks That link provided a little more insight as to what Jack Panella's about
you know what is funny about judge panella? in every one of his past elections, he never sought out the endorsement of NOW or any gay or lesbian group, rather, he received the PA Pro Life endorsement in every election, until this one. Seems a little suspect to me.
you know what is funny about judge panella? in every one of his past elections, he never sought out the endorsement of NOW or any gay or lesbian group, rather, he received the PA Pro Life endorsement in every election, until this one. Seems a little suspect to me.
That's a serious allegation, along the lines of Sestak challenging Specter. Can you provide some evidence say some links to previous endorsements?
That's a serious allegation, along the lines of Sestak challenging Specter. Can you provide some evidence say some links to previous endorsements?
The post above is blatantly false misinformation.
When Jack Panella ran for the Superior Court in 2003 he sought and received endorsements from both the Gay & Lesbian Alliance (GALA) & Liberty City in Philadelphia. Steel-City Stonewall Democrats had not yet been founded.
As far as the pro-life smear. Panella has received the endorsement of the PA National Organization of Women which is an organization that is staunchly pro-choice. In contrast his opponent, Joan Orie Melvin has received this endorsement: http://www.lifepac.net/2009_nov.pdf
The post above is blatantly false misinformation.
When Jack Panella ran for the Superior Court in 2003 he sought and received endorsements from both the Gay & Lesbian Alliance (GALA) & Liberty City in Philadelphia. Steel-City Stonewall Democrats had not yet been founded.
As far as the pro-life smear. Panella has received the endorsement of the PA National Organization of Women which is an organization that is staunchly pro-choice. In contrast his opponent, Joan Orie Melvin has received this endorsement: http://www.lifepac.net/2009_nov.pdf
I am saying that in past elections he has received the PA Pro Life endorsement everytime.
I am saying that in past elections he has received the PA Pro Life endorsement everytime.
I quote
“In the Superior Court election, the Pro-Life Federation
PAC recommends Grainger Bowman (R), Palmer
Dolbin (R), John Driscoll (D) and Jack Panella (D).
While four candidates have earned the PAC’s recommendation,
voters will only be able to vote for three
Superior Court candidates on November 4.”
http://www.empfhl.org/newsletters/November_03_Newsletter.pdf
I quote
“In the Superior Court election, the Pro-Life Federation
PAC recommends Grainger Bowman (R), Palmer
Dolbin (R), John Driscoll (D) and Jack Panella (D).
While four candidates have earned the PAC’s recommendation,
voters will only be able to vote for three
Superior Court candidates on November 4.”
http://www.empfhl.org/newsletters/November_03_Newsletter.pdf
his close advisors told him that in order to attract the female democrats he needed to change to pro-choice or else they would vote for a woman. As i stated, in every one of his past elections he received the pro-life endorsement. i smell political expediency
his close advisors told him that in order to attract the female democrats he needed to change to pro-choice or else they would vote for a woman. As i stated, in every one of his past elections he received the pro-life endorsement. i smell political expediency
I smell a Republican hack. So do you think we should all vote for Joan Orie Melvin, or do you think we should all just not vote in the PA Supreme Court race, or maybe we should just not vote at all?
I guess your silence on the endorsements that Jack Panella has received from LGBT organizations in his past elections means you are admitting that you were half wrong.
Jack Panella may have been weak in choice in the past, but like all of us humans we evolve and change our views. Jack Panella is pro-choice and has been endorsed by the National Organization for Women.
On the other hand, these are the facts about Jane Orie Melvin: she is anti-choice, anti-gay, anti-separation of Church and State and believes that Antonin Scalia is the Supreme Court Judge who most closely demonstrates her judicial philosophy Supreme Court race.
Plus, she supports the Pennsylvania Marriage Protection Amendment which would put a ban on gay marriage and domestic partnership benefits into the Pennsylvania Constitution and she is endorsed by every hard-right organization in the state.
So again, do you think we should all vote for Joan Orie Melvin, or do you think we should all just not vote in the PA Supreme Court race, or do you think we should just not vote at all?
I smell a Republican hack. So do you think we should all vote for Joan Orie Melvin, or do you think we should all just not vote in the PA Supreme Court race, or maybe we should just not vote at all?
I guess your silence on the endorsements that Jack Panella has received from LGBT organizations in his past elections means you are admitting that you were half wrong.
Jack Panella may have been weak in choice in the past, but like all of us humans we evolve and change our views. Jack Panella is pro-choice and has been endorsed by the National Organization for Women.
On the other hand, these are the facts about Jane Orie Melvin: she is anti-choice, anti-gay, anti-separation of Church and State and believes that Antonin Scalia is the Supreme Court Judge who most closely demonstrates her judicial philosophy Supreme Court race.
Plus, she supports the Pennsylvania Marriage Protection Amendment which would put a ban on gay marriage and domestic partnership benefits into the Pennsylvania Constitution and she is endorsed by every hard-right organization in the state.
So again, do you think we should all vote for Joan Orie Melvin, or do you think we should all just not vote in the PA Supreme Court race, or do you think we should just not vote at all?