Clarifying child abuse reporting for Gary S. Goldman, PhD
 

CLARIFYING CHILD ABUSE REPORTING FOR GARY S. GOLDMAN, PHD...

"I would like to get clarification of an e-mail that you sent to me
suggesting that I report suspected child abuse due to some medical
interventions."
--Gary S. Goldman, PhD to Todd D. Gastaldo, DC

OPEN LETTER (archived for global access at http://groups.google.com)

Gary S. Goldman, PhD
Editor-in-Chief
MEDICAL VERITAS

Gary,

You request clarification.

WOMEN SHOULD NOT HAVE TO *ASK* FOR THE "EXTRA" UP TO 30% OF OUTLET AREA.

WOMEN SHOULD NOT HAVE TO *ASK* FOR THE "EXTRA" UP TO 50% OF BLOOD VOLUME FOR
THEIR BABIES.

MOST WOMEN DON'T EVEN KNOW TO ASK.

Since you suspect both semisitting birth and immediate cord clamping are
child abuse (an "atrocity") - you CAN report - indeed ANYONE can report - no
need for the names of children, doctors, etc.

Why report?

Quoting your email, "Those who are closer to the situation might be in a
better position to report" - BUT...

THEY AREN'T REPORTING.

This latter understandable/unconscionable behaviors of MDs and RNs (failure
to stop the crimes and failure to report themselves) is reportable in your
peer-reviewed journal.

If you do not wish to report - then say that in an editorial.

Admit in your high-and-mighty peer-reviewed journal ("for use in
courtrooms") that you do not wish to promote use of the child protective
statutes to protect children.

Todd

Dr. Gastaldo


PS Here is the post I just clarified for you...


----- Original Message -----
From: "Todd Gastaldo"
To: "M HALIBURTON" Donna Young"
Cc: "Kelly Moscarello" "Lisa Muscarella"; "JAMES BLANCO"
Sent: Sunday, March 27, 2005 11:11 AM
Subject: Two essential points (also: Sad day?)


"No essential points were omitted..."
--Mary-Sue to Donna

Mary-Sue,

Speaking of essential points...

MEDICAL VERITAS Editor-in-Chief Gary S. Goldman, PhD is talking about
publishing articles about OBVIOUS CRIMES which he has acknowledge as CHILD
ABUSE...

Step One when child abuse is so much as SUSPECTED is filing suspected
child
abuse reports - not publishing peer-reviewed articles....

After I wrote:

Gary finally indicated that birth-canal-closing/semisitting birth is
child abuse - an "atrocity" - apparently after discussing the matter with
an
MD.

After I asked:

Gary, do you also believe that temporarily (surgically) asphyxiating
babies
and robbing them of up to 50% of their blood volume is child abuse?

Editor-in-Chief Gary wrote to me on March 26: "Answer: Yes, most
certainly."

ESSENTIAL POINT #1: Anyone (Editor-in-Chief Gary for example) MAY file a
suspected child abuse report - but MDs and RNs who suspect child abuse
MUST
file reports - in California - immediately by telephone and in writing
within 24 hours.

ESSENTIAL POINT #2: Although the MDs and RNs committing the crimes are
understandably/unconscionably not stopping the crimes and reporting
themselves for suspected child abuse, other MDs and RNs - reminded by
MEDICAL VERITAS Editor-in-Chief Gary of their LEGAL OBLIGATION - might
just
start reporting - finally using the child protective statutes to protect
children.

What a concept - finally using the child protective statutes to protect
children.

If Editor-in-Chief Gary cannot find an MD or RN to say these obvious
crimes
are child abuse - THAT should be reported - as THAT is the primary
problem.

Step One when child abuse is so much as SUSPECTED is REPORT.

Step Two - when child abuse is mysteriously NOT being suspected/reported -
is report on THAT - in a peer-reviewed journal of course. : )

Todd

PS After her "sad day" post, Donna indicated to me on March 25: "He is
now
working with me, to my satisfaction...
snip

This post will be archived for global access in the Google usenet archive.
Search "Clarifying child abuse reporting for Gary S. Goldman, PhD"
----- Original Message -----
From:
To:
Sent: Sunday, March 27, 2005 6:17 PM
Subject: Question...


Dear Todd,

I would like to get clarification of an e-mail that you sent to me
suggesting that I report suspected child abuse due to some medical
interventions.

First, I do not know the parents or the child that may have been allegedly
abused. I was not a witness to the doctor's or hospitals procedures. I have
not seen the outcome and have no background or underlying circumstances to
the case.

I believe whatever I could repeat which someone else told me would be
considered "heresay".

Those who are closer to the situation might be in a better situation to do
something, instead of a report from me that says, "I heard from so-and-so,
who, in turn, heard from another so-and-so, that an infant suffered child
abuse at the hands of so-and-so. I have never seen or known this child in my
life and have never had contact with the child or any of the related
parties."

Sincerely,
Gary

In a message dated 3/27/2005 4:22:55 P.M. Pacific Standard Time,
writes:
Thanks Gary.

Happy Easter.

Todd