RE: MLAC/Dr. Saboe

[Guest guest]

Colleagues,

We have already spent a year+ debating and polling ourselves on this issue; have a document in place that impresses the legislators, puts the insurances on notice that, in order to judge us, they must provide a mininal basic examination, and a document which has been strongly approved by all of us.

Where was the discussion from ODOC during that year's worth of conjecture and polling? If they voted during the 2 surveys (or was it 3, Vern?) done by the CAO, their vote was in the minority and (last I checked) the majority still rules. We've already agreed on the verbiage...the polling has shown majority consensus. Uncle Vern's work and the response from the legislature has already shown the CJ's necessity and assistance in 'getting things done'. What purpose does it serve to rehash it again? I appreciate Dr. Setera' comments but where were they as we did our year's worth debate last year?

If we do decide to revisit this issue, seems to me it would be appropriate for polling and surverys to be completed again.

my two cents. Sunny

Sunny Kierstyn, RN DC Fibromyalgia Care Center of Oregon 2677 Willakenzie Road, 7C

Eugene, Oregon, 97401

541- 344- 0509; Fx; 541- 344- 0955

From: rpsdc@...To: Oregondcs Subject: MLAC/Dr. SaboeDate: Wed, 01 Feb 2006 11:51:01 -0500

OregonDCs rules:1. Keep correspondence professional; the purpose of the listserve is to foster communication and collegiality. No personal attacks on listserve members will be tolerated.2. Always sign your e-mails with your first and last name.3. The listserve is not secure; your e-mail could end up anywhere. However, it is against the rules of the listserve to copy, print, forward, or otherwise distribute correspondence written by another member without his or her consent, unless all personal identifiers have been removed.