- Joined
- Jun 13, 2023
- Messages
- 9,558
- Points
- 113
Tiok lah.The point is moral blackmail. She was trying to insinuate that the doctor demanded $100,000 to save a life.
That obviously was not the case. The doctor saved her father's life with a clot-busting drug at the first instance.
She made it clear the doctor was insensitive to have demanded for money while her father was still struggling to survive.
What if the treatment that was proposed was not $100,000 but $100. Would anyone have said the doctor was insensitive?
So it's the cost of the treatment that she was unhappy about and she took it out on the good doctor under the pretext of sensitivity.
If the doctor had not asked but had chosen to perform the $100,000 treatment immediately, would the doctor be sensitive by her standard? And she would not kpkb if she subsequently received a whopping $100,000 bill from the hospital?
This is the same as sinkies paying $15 for chap chai png and kpkb after that. We all know what she will do. Eh...The doctor didn't inform us beforehand that bill would be so expensive etc.
It has nothing to do with being sensitive or insensitive. It's all about money.
She mixed up 2 separate issue during this rampage.
She should acknowledge about the loctor saved her father life first, then when being told about the 100k treatment, then she can tell the loctor to ask pap to change the healthcare motto.