I notice that Stanford's website now has a different video for the Gomco, but the old video with Dr. Richard Greene has now surfaced on YouTube. At least I think it's the old video. It's either been further edited and text has been added, or Dr. Greene is rehashing his same disturbing pretty penis and rosebud monologue on a new Gomco demonstration.
Didn't Stanford own this video? Unless they put it on there themselves (which I doubt very seriously after reading the text), the editing and posting is a copyright violation. I'm thinking some doctor owns it, anyway. Sometime during the video Dr. Greene refers to it as a training video, but the text is really amateurish and whoever posted it is clearly trying to get a rise out of intactivists. The problem is that YouTube won't accept a report of copyright infringement from anyone but the owner of the video or a legal representative.
Is there anything that can be done about this? Any way to find out who owns it, if not Stanford? IMO, this is the most vile of all the circ videos that I've seen, and that's saying a lot. The whole thing is about the mom and the doctor altering this baby's penis to their personal specifications, down to the placement of the scar line.
I believe that video is still on the training site on the Stanford website. Perhaps emailing the website manager or someone at the hospital would alert them to copyright.
Frankly, I think it is disgraceful that the video is allowed as a source for training. In one of them, it practically is an endorsement for the doc in it, because it states that many of the doctors request "him" and then the pretty penis comments.
It is a sad and sickening video (all of the teaching circ videos are), and frankly I would imagine that most people are slightly shocked by it. To me it is pretty obvious the child is in a great deal of pain and they are glossing over it-- it may seem callous as a training prop- so I imagine that could be the defense used- that it is meant for training purposes and that the average parent is just too sensitive to normal surgical procedures, etc.
The images on the website are quite graphic, too.
I'm not going back on there again. I made reference to it a few months ago, and I'm still not ready to do that to myself again. It does serve to make me more steadfast.
Dh, Joshua Rebeccaand . for Laura
|32 members and 17,490 guests|
|a-sorta-fairytale , bananabee , Deborah , Dovenoir , emmy526 , girlspn , hillymum , Hopeful2017 , ilana cohen , katelove , kathymuggle , LiLStar , manyhatsmom , Michele123 , Mirzam , moominmamma , ndoretha , Nessiesmith81 , philomom , rightkindofme , RollerCoasterMama , rubelin , samaxtics , seap3 , Skippy918 , Springshowers , thefragile7393 , zebra15|
|Most users ever online was 449,755, 06-25-2014 at 12:21 PM.|