Original Story: newswire.net
When you go to a medical facility or hospital, you expect to receive professional care. While there are no guarantees that the doctor or physician can help you, there’s certainly an expectation that they will do their best. Unfortunately, this doesn’t always happen.
The Current State of Medical Malpractice
If you’ve never been close to a medical malpractice case, it may seem like something that only happens in John Grisham books and Hollywood flicks. Oh, if only this were true. Medical malpractice is a pervasive problem today and likely will be for the foreseeable future. A Hackensack medical malpractice lawyer is following this story closely.
Here are some statistics you need to know, as gathered by MedicalMalpractice.com.
According to a recent study of malpractice cases, 60 percent of victims are female and the median age is 38 years old. Around 20 percent of patients are newborns, while 12 percent are 65 or older.
OBGYNs are the defendants in 19 percent of cases, while general surgeons (17 percent) and primary care physicians (16 percent) follow closely behind.
The average compensation for inpatient malpractice is $363,000, while the average award for outpatient care is right around $290,000.
For inpatient care, 34 percent of medical malpractice claims are rooted in surgical errors. For outpatient care, 46 percent of claims are tied to diagnosis errors.
This should give you a better idea of what the current state of medical malpractice looks like in the United States. Trends are always changing, though, so make sure you stay up to date.
Three Things You Need to Know
Now that you’re familiar with some of the data behind medical malpractice cases, let’s check out some of the top things you need to know in order to be informed. A Newark medical malpractice attorney has a track record of success in medical malpractice litigation cases.
1. Standard of Care
“Medical malpractice cases are assessed based on a ‘standard of care,’” Jax Legal explains. “That means that if the physician or medical professional did not meet the standards, they are guilty of medical malpractice. A standard refers to how others in a similar professional capacity would have acted.”
In any medical malpractice case, everything is going to come back to the standard of care. If the medical professional was deemed to have provided the same standard of care as that of his peers, then he will almost always be acquitted of any responsibility. However, if it’s deemed that he didn’t live up to that standard of care, then the plaintiff usually wins.
2. How to Proceed
If you suspect you’re a victim of medical malpractice, the first step is to contact the medical professional you believe is at fault. The doctor will tell you the situation and may even offer some sort of corrective service, free of charge.
If contacting the medical professional doesn’t remedy the issue, you may reach out to the licensing board that governs medical licenses. They can often provide enough pressure to make something happen. Finally, you may wish to contact an attorney and file a medical malpractice claim. Just know that certain limitations and timeframes may be applicable.
3. Settlements vs. Litigation
“Medical malpractice cases can be timely and costly, which is why most medical malpractice cases are settled out of court,” FindLaw explains. “In addition, because medical malpractice insurance companies reject a significantly large portion of medical malpractice claims, it may be in your best interest to settle out-of-court or risk having no case at all.”
However, should you and your attorney feel like you have a very strong case, then, by all means, seek a larger settlement or take the case to court. A Minneapolis medical malpractice lawyer is reviewing the details of this case.
Medical Malpractice is Serious Business
Medical malpractice is a big deal. While the odds of you or a loved one ever being subjected to malpractice in the United States are quite low, it never hurts to understand your rights and contact a legal professional if you suspect an issue.
30 September 2016
DEMAND FOR MEDICAL MALPRACTICE INSURANCE TO SPIKE IN THE NEXT FIVE YEARS
Original Story: yahoo.com
Senior healthcare organisations forecast to take up 40%.
Demand for medical malpractice insurance by senior healthcare organisations in Singapore is forecast to grow by 40 per cent over the next five years, according to AIG Asia Pacific Insurance Pte. Ltd. ('AIG Singapore'). A Baltimore medical malpractice lawyer is reviewing the details of this story.
Driving this demand is the number of residents aged over 65 years here, which is expected to double from 440,000 to 900,000 by 2030[1], as well as rising incidents of chronic and complex conditions. These factors are putting the healthcare system under pressure, potentially increasing the risk of medical errors.
Similarly, the take-up rate for malpractice insurance for general healthcare institutions is projected to increase by 25 per cent in the next five years. A survey undertaken by AIG in Asia[2] revealed that the top concerns for Singapore healthcare organisations and their patients include inadequate patient handovers between caregivers, failure to correctly conduct independent double checks, and medication prescription errors as more patients get treated by multiple public and private health care professionals.
These risk areas align with complaints received by the Singapore Medical Council in 2015[3]. Out of 141 complaints, one of the most common causes was professional negligence or incompetence which accounted for 28 per cent of complaints. A Hackensack medical malpractice attorney understand the sense of loss and tragedy that a medical malpractice or negligent accident often causes.
AIG’s Head of Casualty Risk Consulting – Healthcare, Dr Aileen Killen, said AIG Singapore has seen a 300 per cent increase in medical malpractice insurance enquiries in the last year by both healthcare institutions and professionals, with a significant proportion from senior healthcare organisations.
“While hospitals and healthcare professionals have no legal obligation to insure themselves, we are seeing a strong rise in demand for medical malpractice insurance due to the increased pressures on medical staff driven by factors such as an ageing population.”
Dr Killen added, “There is a need to proactively address the risks that can arise from these pressures and for healthcare organisations to build preventive solutions into their systems. This ensures that healthcare professionals are better equipped to proactively manage risk instead of reacting to issues after the fact. In this way, healthcare organisations can keep their staff safe, and this has a major positive impact on patient outcomes and safety.” A Washington DC medical malpractice attorney helps clients receive the justice they deserve.
Research has found that there is a direct correlation between workplace safety culture scores and higher burnout rates. Aggressive patients, falls caused by unstable patients, and injuries from lifting patients are all risk areas for healthcare workers.
“Creating a safety culture begins with the well-being of healthcare professionals. It is vital to ensure adequate support for these workers for a coordinated approach to patient safety, which will ultimately create a safer environment for both patients and workers,” said Dr Killen.
Senior healthcare organisations forecast to take up 40%.
Demand for medical malpractice insurance by senior healthcare organisations in Singapore is forecast to grow by 40 per cent over the next five years, according to AIG Asia Pacific Insurance Pte. Ltd. ('AIG Singapore'). A Baltimore medical malpractice lawyer is reviewing the details of this story.
Driving this demand is the number of residents aged over 65 years here, which is expected to double from 440,000 to 900,000 by 2030[1], as well as rising incidents of chronic and complex conditions. These factors are putting the healthcare system under pressure, potentially increasing the risk of medical errors.
Similarly, the take-up rate for malpractice insurance for general healthcare institutions is projected to increase by 25 per cent in the next five years. A survey undertaken by AIG in Asia[2] revealed that the top concerns for Singapore healthcare organisations and their patients include inadequate patient handovers between caregivers, failure to correctly conduct independent double checks, and medication prescription errors as more patients get treated by multiple public and private health care professionals.
These risk areas align with complaints received by the Singapore Medical Council in 2015[3]. Out of 141 complaints, one of the most common causes was professional negligence or incompetence which accounted for 28 per cent of complaints. A Hackensack medical malpractice attorney understand the sense of loss and tragedy that a medical malpractice or negligent accident often causes.
AIG’s Head of Casualty Risk Consulting – Healthcare, Dr Aileen Killen, said AIG Singapore has seen a 300 per cent increase in medical malpractice insurance enquiries in the last year by both healthcare institutions and professionals, with a significant proportion from senior healthcare organisations.
“While hospitals and healthcare professionals have no legal obligation to insure themselves, we are seeing a strong rise in demand for medical malpractice insurance due to the increased pressures on medical staff driven by factors such as an ageing population.”
Dr Killen added, “There is a need to proactively address the risks that can arise from these pressures and for healthcare organisations to build preventive solutions into their systems. This ensures that healthcare professionals are better equipped to proactively manage risk instead of reacting to issues after the fact. In this way, healthcare organisations can keep their staff safe, and this has a major positive impact on patient outcomes and safety.” A Washington DC medical malpractice attorney helps clients receive the justice they deserve.
Research has found that there is a direct correlation between workplace safety culture scores and higher burnout rates. Aggressive patients, falls caused by unstable patients, and injuries from lifting patients are all risk areas for healthcare workers.
“Creating a safety culture begins with the well-being of healthcare professionals. It is vital to ensure adequate support for these workers for a coordinated approach to patient safety, which will ultimately create a safer environment for both patients and workers,” said Dr Killen.
2 INDIAN AMERICAN CARDIOLOGISTS IN INDIANA SUED FOR MEDICAL MALPRACTICE
Original Story: americanbazaaronline.com
WASHINGTON, DC: More than two dozen medical malpractice lawsuits, including three wrongful death allegations, have been filed against three Lake County, Indiana cardiologists accused of performing scores of unnecessary surgical procedures at Community Hospital in Munster. A Chicago wrongful death lawyer provides experienced and passionate wrongful death legal representation across a range of civil litigation matters.
The defendants in the lawsuits are Dr. Arvind Gandhi, Dr. Satyaprakash Makam and Dr. Wail Asfour, Cardiology Associates of Northwest Indiana, PC and Munster Medical Research Foundation, Inc., doing business as Community Hospital, according to a press release issued by attorneys from Cohen & Malad, LLP, Theodoros & Rooth, PC, and the Law Office of Paul A. Rossi, last month.
The law firms’ 19 new lawsuits – and a total of 28 lawsuits – have been filed with the Indiana Department of Insurance or in state courts against cardiologists at Cardiology Associates of Northwest Indiana, PC, and Munster Medical Research Foundation, Inc., doing business as Community Hospital. A Newark medical malpractice attorney is reviewing the details of this case.
A formal complaint was also filed with the Indiana Attorney General against members of his medical group. The Indiana AG refers cases to the Medical Licensing Board.
The allegations against the defendants include numerous instances of unnecessary pacemaker implantation, death caused by unnecessary pacemaker installation, unnecessary open-heart surgery, unnecessary angiograms, unnecessary stenting, and unnecessary cardiac defibrillator (ICD) implantation.
David Cutshaw, of Cohen & Malad, LLP, said in a statement, “For far too long, questions have been raised about the conduct of Dr. Gandhi, his associates, and Community Hospital. As we allege, more and more families throughout northwestern Indiana now know they or their family members were subjected to cardiac surgeries and other procedures that were unnecessary and dangerous.”
Barry Rooth, of Theodoros & Rooth, PC, said in a statement, “The evidence we have developed in our investigation and the litigation – and the persistent silence of Community Hospital – raises troubling questions about Dr. Gandhi and his associates and why the hospital did not heed internal warnings they received for nearly a decade.” A Minneapolis medical malpractice lawyer is following this story closely.
In May, two other former Gandhi patients, Raymond Kammer and Gloria Sargent sued the three defendants, alleging unnecessary surgeries and complications, according to the press release.
Sargent alleges that complications from an unnecessary “upgrade” of an implant cardiac defibrillator (ICD) in 2006 required her to later undergo a heart transplant. In both cases, three-doctor Medical Review Panels unanimously found that Dr. Gandhi committed medical malpractice.
WASHINGTON, DC: More than two dozen medical malpractice lawsuits, including three wrongful death allegations, have been filed against three Lake County, Indiana cardiologists accused of performing scores of unnecessary surgical procedures at Community Hospital in Munster. A Chicago wrongful death lawyer provides experienced and passionate wrongful death legal representation across a range of civil litigation matters.
The defendants in the lawsuits are Dr. Arvind Gandhi, Dr. Satyaprakash Makam and Dr. Wail Asfour, Cardiology Associates of Northwest Indiana, PC and Munster Medical Research Foundation, Inc., doing business as Community Hospital, according to a press release issued by attorneys from Cohen & Malad, LLP, Theodoros & Rooth, PC, and the Law Office of Paul A. Rossi, last month.
The law firms’ 19 new lawsuits – and a total of 28 lawsuits – have been filed with the Indiana Department of Insurance or in state courts against cardiologists at Cardiology Associates of Northwest Indiana, PC, and Munster Medical Research Foundation, Inc., doing business as Community Hospital. A Newark medical malpractice attorney is reviewing the details of this case.
A formal complaint was also filed with the Indiana Attorney General against members of his medical group. The Indiana AG refers cases to the Medical Licensing Board.
The allegations against the defendants include numerous instances of unnecessary pacemaker implantation, death caused by unnecessary pacemaker installation, unnecessary open-heart surgery, unnecessary angiograms, unnecessary stenting, and unnecessary cardiac defibrillator (ICD) implantation.
David Cutshaw, of Cohen & Malad, LLP, said in a statement, “For far too long, questions have been raised about the conduct of Dr. Gandhi, his associates, and Community Hospital. As we allege, more and more families throughout northwestern Indiana now know they or their family members were subjected to cardiac surgeries and other procedures that were unnecessary and dangerous.”
Barry Rooth, of Theodoros & Rooth, PC, said in a statement, “The evidence we have developed in our investigation and the litigation – and the persistent silence of Community Hospital – raises troubling questions about Dr. Gandhi and his associates and why the hospital did not heed internal warnings they received for nearly a decade.” A Minneapolis medical malpractice lawyer is following this story closely.
In May, two other former Gandhi patients, Raymond Kammer and Gloria Sargent sued the three defendants, alleging unnecessary surgeries and complications, according to the press release.
Sargent alleges that complications from an unnecessary “upgrade” of an implant cardiac defibrillator (ICD) in 2006 required her to later undergo a heart transplant. In both cases, three-doctor Medical Review Panels unanimously found that Dr. Gandhi committed medical malpractice.
SPORTS TEAM DOCTORS WANT MEDICAL MALPRACTICE PROTECTION WHEN TRAVELING OUT OF STATE
Original Story: insurancejournal.com
Congress has advanced legislation to clarify that sports doctors’ medical malpractice insurance should follow them when they travel out of state with their teams.
The House of Representatives this week approved the Sports Medicine Licensure Clarity Act (US HR 921), which had 190 sponsors and was co-sponsored by Reps. Brett Guthrie (R-Ky) and Cedric Richmond (D-La). A Minneapolis medical malpractice lawyer represents clients in medical negligence cases.
The bill will now be sent to the U.S. Senate for consideration (US S 689).
The measure aims to protects team physicians and athletic trainers when they travel across state lines with their teams to treat the athletes under their care.
The American Medical Society for Sports Medicine (AMSSM) backs the bill and says it has worked for four years with other groups including the National Athletic Trainers’ Association and the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons to gain support.
The bill stipulates that health care services provided by a covered sports medicine professional to an athlete, athletic team, or team staff member in a secondary state outside that professional’s state of licensure will be covered by the appropriate medical malpractice insurance provider.
Currently, AMSSM says sports medicine professionals who travel outside of their state to provide care for athletes are often not covered by their medical malpractice insurance – largely because of jurisdictional issues. Supporters say the federal bill would allow sport medicine providers to engage in the treatment of injured athletes across state lines without taking on unnecessary professional and financial risk. A Baltimore medical malpractice attorney is following this story closely.
“This commonsense bill will bring certainty to the health professionals tasked with taking care of our athletes,” said Rep. Guthrie in a statement. “It’s a win for everyone involved and ensures those that know our athletes best are responsible for their care, even when playing and traveling out of state.”
Congress has advanced legislation to clarify that sports doctors’ medical malpractice insurance should follow them when they travel out of state with their teams.
The House of Representatives this week approved the Sports Medicine Licensure Clarity Act (US HR 921), which had 190 sponsors and was co-sponsored by Reps. Brett Guthrie (R-Ky) and Cedric Richmond (D-La). A Minneapolis medical malpractice lawyer represents clients in medical negligence cases.
The bill will now be sent to the U.S. Senate for consideration (US S 689).
The measure aims to protects team physicians and athletic trainers when they travel across state lines with their teams to treat the athletes under their care.
The American Medical Society for Sports Medicine (AMSSM) backs the bill and says it has worked for four years with other groups including the National Athletic Trainers’ Association and the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons to gain support.
The bill stipulates that health care services provided by a covered sports medicine professional to an athlete, athletic team, or team staff member in a secondary state outside that professional’s state of licensure will be covered by the appropriate medical malpractice insurance provider.
Currently, AMSSM says sports medicine professionals who travel outside of their state to provide care for athletes are often not covered by their medical malpractice insurance – largely because of jurisdictional issues. Supporters say the federal bill would allow sport medicine providers to engage in the treatment of injured athletes across state lines without taking on unnecessary professional and financial risk. A Baltimore medical malpractice attorney is following this story closely.
“This commonsense bill will bring certainty to the health professionals tasked with taking care of our athletes,” said Rep. Guthrie in a statement. “It’s a win for everyone involved and ensures those that know our athletes best are responsible for their care, even when playing and traveling out of state.”
DOCTOR CONFESSES: I LIED TO PROTECT COLLEAGUE IN MALPRACTICE SUIT
Original Story: npr.org
Almost two decades ago, Dr. Lars Aanning sat on the witness stand in a medical malpractice trial and faced a dilemma.
The South Dakota surgeon had been called to vouch for the expertise of one of his partners whose patient had suffered a stroke and permanent disability after an operation. The problem was that Aanning had, in his own mind, questioned his colleague's skill. His partner's patients had suffered injuries related to his procedures. But Aanning understood why his partner's attorney had called him as a witness: Doctors don't squeal on doctors. A Chicago medical malpractice lawyer is following this story closely.
The attorney asked the key question: Did Aanning know of any time his partner's work had been substandard?
"No, never," Aanning said.
Now, Aanning, in a stunning admission for a medical professional, has a blunter answer: "I lied."
While it's impossible to know to what extent Aanning's testimony influenced the outcome, the jury sided in favor of his colleague — and, ever since, Aanning said, he has felt haunted by his decision.
Now, 77 and retired, he decided to write about his choice and why he made it in a recent column for his local newspaper, The Yankton County Observer. He also posted the article in the ProPublica Patient Safety Facebook group. Aanning, who is a member, called it "A Surgeon's Belated Confession." A Hackensack medical malpractice attorney represents clients injured due to the negligence of a medical professional.
"From that very moment I knew I had lied — lied under oath — and violated all my pledges of professionalism that came with the Doctor of Medicine degree and membership in the [American Medical Association]," Aanning wrote.
Aanning, who has become an outspoken patient advocate, now assists the medical malpractice attorney who represented the patient in the case in which he lied for his partner.
There's no way to tell how often doctors lie to protect their colleagues, but ProPublica has found that patients frequently aren't told the truth when they are harmed. Studies also show that many physicians do not have a favorable view of informing patients about mistakes and that health care workers are afraid to speak up if things don't seem right. Many doctors and nurses have told ProPublica that they fear retaliation if they speak out about patient safety problems.
ProPublica spoke to Aanning about his unusual column and why he decided to confess all these years later. The interview has been edited for clarity and length. A Washington D.C. medical malpractice lawyer is reviewing the details of this case.
Why did you tell the lie?
I did it as a matter of course. And I did it because there was a cultural attitude I was immersed in: You viewed all attorneys as a threat, and anything that you did was OK to thwart their efforts to sue your colleagues. I just accepted that as normal. It wasn't like, "I'm going to lie." It was, "I'm going to support my colleague."
Did you feel pressure from your peers to never criticize a colleague?
Pressure is the prevailing attitude of the medical profession. The professional societies like the AMA and the American College of Surgeons say you should be a patient advocate at all times. But that goes out the window because here you are, banding together with your peers. Because if you don't, you'll be like a man without a country.
Why are you telling the truth now?
I'm retired now. The big benefit is they can't hurt me, but I can't go to the clinic for any help. All my doctors are out of town. I came to America from Norway in '47 and grew up in New York. I've always been a rabble-rouser. This testifying falsely at this trial was not like me, so it stands out. It's not how I do stuff.
I also told the truth about my lie because I have been helping some of these plaintiffs' lawyers with their cases. It seems that the courtroom is not the arena for adjudication of medical right or wrong. I shared my story to give an explicit example of why you can't always rely on physician testimony in court. I think that's the big reason. There's got to be a different way to help people who have been medically harmed. Looking to the legal system is like mixing oil and water.
Do you feel like it's your fault the patient lost the case?
I haven't touched on that question. It would make it painful for me. I would be moved to tears if that whole case revolved around just my testimony. I was on the stand so briefly. But cumulatively between what I said and the other testimony — it was never a level playing field for the plaintiff. People don't recognize it. How the judges don't recognize it and the system doesn't recognize it is beyond me. It's something I'm coming to grips with.
Have you thought about talking to the patient's family?
The attorney said something about meeting the patient's widow in his office, or something like that. I worry about whether my testimony weighed on the final verdict or not. It's something that you just have to face up to. It's too late to deflect it.
Do you feel any better or worse now that you've gone public with your moral failure?
I'm not altruistic. I'm not a crusader. I got into writing this column accidentally, so I just kind of find myself in this position. I get a great satisfaction out of defining what I see and writing about it. I hope nobody's going to come back at me and accuse me of bad conduct. Although that's what it was. I felt bad about it.
Almost two decades ago, Dr. Lars Aanning sat on the witness stand in a medical malpractice trial and faced a dilemma.
The South Dakota surgeon had been called to vouch for the expertise of one of his partners whose patient had suffered a stroke and permanent disability after an operation. The problem was that Aanning had, in his own mind, questioned his colleague's skill. His partner's patients had suffered injuries related to his procedures. But Aanning understood why his partner's attorney had called him as a witness: Doctors don't squeal on doctors. A Chicago medical malpractice lawyer is following this story closely.
The attorney asked the key question: Did Aanning know of any time his partner's work had been substandard?
"No, never," Aanning said.
Now, Aanning, in a stunning admission for a medical professional, has a blunter answer: "I lied."
While it's impossible to know to what extent Aanning's testimony influenced the outcome, the jury sided in favor of his colleague — and, ever since, Aanning said, he has felt haunted by his decision.
Now, 77 and retired, he decided to write about his choice and why he made it in a recent column for his local newspaper, The Yankton County Observer. He also posted the article in the ProPublica Patient Safety Facebook group. Aanning, who is a member, called it "A Surgeon's Belated Confession." A Hackensack medical malpractice attorney represents clients injured due to the negligence of a medical professional.
"From that very moment I knew I had lied — lied under oath — and violated all my pledges of professionalism that came with the Doctor of Medicine degree and membership in the [American Medical Association]," Aanning wrote.
Aanning, who has become an outspoken patient advocate, now assists the medical malpractice attorney who represented the patient in the case in which he lied for his partner.
There's no way to tell how often doctors lie to protect their colleagues, but ProPublica has found that patients frequently aren't told the truth when they are harmed. Studies also show that many physicians do not have a favorable view of informing patients about mistakes and that health care workers are afraid to speak up if things don't seem right. Many doctors and nurses have told ProPublica that they fear retaliation if they speak out about patient safety problems.
ProPublica spoke to Aanning about his unusual column and why he decided to confess all these years later. The interview has been edited for clarity and length. A Washington D.C. medical malpractice lawyer is reviewing the details of this case.
Why did you tell the lie?
I did it as a matter of course. And I did it because there was a cultural attitude I was immersed in: You viewed all attorneys as a threat, and anything that you did was OK to thwart their efforts to sue your colleagues. I just accepted that as normal. It wasn't like, "I'm going to lie." It was, "I'm going to support my colleague."
Did you feel pressure from your peers to never criticize a colleague?
Pressure is the prevailing attitude of the medical profession. The professional societies like the AMA and the American College of Surgeons say you should be a patient advocate at all times. But that goes out the window because here you are, banding together with your peers. Because if you don't, you'll be like a man without a country.
Why are you telling the truth now?
I'm retired now. The big benefit is they can't hurt me, but I can't go to the clinic for any help. All my doctors are out of town. I came to America from Norway in '47 and grew up in New York. I've always been a rabble-rouser. This testifying falsely at this trial was not like me, so it stands out. It's not how I do stuff.
I also told the truth about my lie because I have been helping some of these plaintiffs' lawyers with their cases. It seems that the courtroom is not the arena for adjudication of medical right or wrong. I shared my story to give an explicit example of why you can't always rely on physician testimony in court. I think that's the big reason. There's got to be a different way to help people who have been medically harmed. Looking to the legal system is like mixing oil and water.
Do you feel like it's your fault the patient lost the case?
I haven't touched on that question. It would make it painful for me. I would be moved to tears if that whole case revolved around just my testimony. I was on the stand so briefly. But cumulatively between what I said and the other testimony — it was never a level playing field for the plaintiff. People don't recognize it. How the judges don't recognize it and the system doesn't recognize it is beyond me. It's something I'm coming to grips with.
Have you thought about talking to the patient's family?
The attorney said something about meeting the patient's widow in his office, or something like that. I worry about whether my testimony weighed on the final verdict or not. It's something that you just have to face up to. It's too late to deflect it.
Do you feel any better or worse now that you've gone public with your moral failure?
I'm not altruistic. I'm not a crusader. I got into writing this column accidentally, so I just kind of find myself in this position. I get a great satisfaction out of defining what I see and writing about it. I hope nobody's going to come back at me and accuse me of bad conduct. Although that's what it was. I felt bad about it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
