 |
 |
I agree with Wendy that the show did a good job of representing PD and the complications and altercations of FTI. Yes, some of the information they presented wasn't dead on, but they weren't totally off either. As many people pointed out one of the *main* obstacles of the show, was the illegality of the donation for a specific recipient, so whomever originally wrote the "misinformation" points must not have paid really close attention to the story line. About the pro-lifers approach, do you remember that the chief of staff (i think that is his position) was Catholic, and dead set against the procedure? I thought all sides were represented well, and people are going to take it how they want no matter what you do right or wrong. The main point of my letter (originally) was to say, does anyone remember when that guy wrote to us on the list and asked for input on FTT? As I watched I realized that they had used a lot of the info that different people had sent them. I thought it was really neat that they asked this list. Sarah >>Parkinson's & Fetal Tissue Implantation (FTI) >>"CHICAGO HOPE" (repeat) >>Wife of PDer gets pregnant then aborts to >>donate fetus for husbands FTI therapy > >>Misinformation: (to complain about, undo) >>1. Many (6-12) fetal brains needed for 1 FTI >>2. Illegal to donate to specific recipient > >> Bad PR: (more to complain about, undo) >>1. Right-to-lifers believe this is happening >>2. PD has surgical cure > >Hey now, it wasn't all that bad. As for misinformation #2, it >was clearly stated that this was illegal, but they had a court >order that allowed the exception. As for bad PR#1 - believe >*what* is happening - FTI's? Well, aren't they? PR#2 - I >don't recall them saying it was a cure (maybe I missed it) > -- they did say it was his "last hope." > >At least one *positive* things that came out of it was a better >understanding of the profound effect of PD on a person's life, >including the effect on family & friends. Also, the struggle >this couple went through to reach the decision they did -- it >really showed the moral & ethical viewpoints of everyone >involved - patient, family, medical staff, etc. > >I read that one of the national Parkinson's groups was >involved with the planning of this show. If this is true, why >was their so much "misinformation" and "bad PR" ?? The >show probably took some liberties with the details, as they >do with *many* of the medical happenings on the show -- >they are not always 100% accurate, but then again it's >supposed to be entertainment, not a documentary. Just an >opinion. > >Wendy R.