Recent comments in /f/massachusetts

Adorable_List3836 t1_j675ree wrote

Who knows, you’re throwing out a lot of assumptions, maybe she wasn’t showing any kind of suspicious behavior before all of this unfolded. There are a lot of questions to be asked about this and there won’t be many answers, nobody knows what happened inside that house except for her, if she did suffer from PPD, she could have hid the symptoms until she snapped, you don’t know how this family lived their lives. The “system” and other family members shouldn’t be blamed for this until more information is available.

20

biddily t1_j673lbe wrote

"Be Civil & No trolling"

I don't know if my thick as fuck Boston accent can abide by this. The amount of 'Fuck You's", and "The Brockton Papa-Gino's" That just come out of my mouth on a daily basis is just obscene.

Im a fucking DORCHESTER TOWNIE. You can't expect me to not be an obscene troll. I look at your Western MA tag, and understand you might be a little confused by what that means, but it means insulting people is my love language. Saying 'John - go fuck yourself - you fucking tool'. is how we say 'I love you'. I can't help it.

I use 'fuckin' as a thought placeholder instead of 'umm' or 'like'. Thats how obscene I am.

14

Linux-Is-Best OP t1_j6736tp wrote

Opinion:

Everything is awful. There is no perfect viewpoint.

I feel the system, and the people around the family, failed. If she was that bad, why was she not in a care facility? She clearly was not stable enough to be the acting parent (caregiver) of a child. Why did the husband trust his wife to leave her unattended? Where was "Child Family Services" in all this? I mean, damn, should these kids be unsupervised with her having full custody given how unwell she was?!

There is a fine line between experiencing a mental crisis and having the intention to do something. If she planned this in advance, that in my opinion would suggest some thought-out reasoning, as opposed to a moment of madness. That fine line unfortunately can be used as an excuse to get away with something you should not, just as easily as it could wrongfully blame someone who was "out of it." That unfortunately is the "snag" because where that line begins and ends is not always clear.

Ultimately, everyone failed those children. Everyone.

−38

CHGhee t1_j6730qb wrote

I think it makes sense to be wary of non-directed living donations or deceased donations. Clearly any sort of incentive system is pretty appalling. But what about a directed kidney or liver donation to a immediate family member?

Forcing someone to watch a loved-one die when they could have helped them outside of jail, seems cruel and unnecessary.

25

Maronita2020 t1_j671xev wrote

Reply to comment by PolkaD0tMom in Mass health question by [deleted]

I'm not the person you were responding to but I think the public health emergency is already considered over. I'm on Mass Health and have been since 2005 and yet had to go through a redetermination in 2022 to ascertain that I was still eligible for it otherwise they were going to terminate my Mass Health coverage. Mass Health has also reinstituted prescription drug copays, etc.

1

CHGhee t1_j670z0t wrote

There is more time spent investigating potential organ donors but the absolute restrictions are actually much less strict. While blood supplies have been scarce over the last few years, availability of donor organs is extremely limited. And organs must be matched to a recipient in many ways aside from blood type (size for example).

So transplant medicine has gone to great lengths to maximize the potential for organ donations. This includes transplanting from donors who were incarcerated, are Hep C positive, or HIV positive. These risks do require a conversation between the recipient and their doctor, but may make sense in some cases (such as if the potential recipient is also Hep C positive or if it does not appear they would survive long enough to receive another organ offer).

A similar idea applies to tissue donation. People are more likely to die in a way that allows them to be tissue donors (skin, corneas, etc) and the recipient’s health is less critical. So there are stricter eligibility criteria for tissue donation than organ.

But regardless, I think this kind of incentive is a truly bad idea.

33