Please help!!! need to know my rights

Status
Not open for further replies.

brendalsmith

New Member
A year ago last nov my husband was working for a local city waste water plant and due to negligence of another employee was sprayed in the face with chlorine gas. His boss knew it happened because he was there. He just said oh you will be ok. Well about a month later he had to leave work to go to a doctor because he couldnt catch his breath. He was diagnosed with asthma which he had never had before this. He was given and inhaler and instructed to stop smoking which he did. A few months later we moved and he changed jobs. Shortly after starting the new job his breathing problems got increasingly worse and he was forced to resign because he could not preform his duties. He has tried to work serveral other jobs but has not found any that were not hindered by his asthma and issues related to the asthma. He started going to a local clinic which gave him more inhalers and daily breathing medication and also placed him on meds for panic attacks, aniexty, and depression due to the asthma. He has breathing test done and it showed that his lungs are only functioning at 79% which classifies as COPD. I am wanting to know if i have any legal rights to make the city pay him for his medical, pain and suffering, and inablilty to work and support his family. He even has trouble doing regular household activities. If anyone could give me any information it would be greatly appreciated. Thanks and God Bless.
 
You have no rights. You weren't harmed by the chlorine, he allegedly was harmed. However, was the incident documented?

I suggest he speak with an attorney that handles workers compensation claims. He may have a remedy in the workers compensation area.
 
DC,I think you should do a ctiuiqre of the Pearce Piece that Abdreas kindly linked us to I just posted this at NewScientist: Fred,This piece, (like your gross misrepresentation of Mojib Latif's speech at the third World Climate Conference in 2009), is riddled with errors. Not to mention clearly being sympathetic towards the skeptics and being uncritical of the nefarious actions of the people like Mosher, McIntyre and Curry. These people want the best of both worlds, they attack, slander and defame climate scientists and then at the same time expect to be treated with respect and claim to want to reconcile . This is nothing but PR campaign by the skeptics Fred, and I'm sad to see that it seems you have bought it hook-line and sinker.Some points, there were probably not 28 climate scientists at the conference. Do you consider Goddard a climate scientist? McIntyre is not a statistician by training. You misrepresented Dr. Gavin Schmidt's position on attending the conference (go to Eli Rabett's place for clarification) it seems that you did not solicit his opinion before writing this. The workshop was also financed by the Gulbenkian Foundation do some research on them Fred, they have ties to big oil.The scientific literature has shown again and again that the observed warming can not be explained by ENSO or PDO or other internal climate modes, because they simply move heat around in the system. Trenberth et al. (2002, JGR) showed that +0.06 C of the +0.4 C warming (about 15%) observed between 1950 and 1998 was attributable to trends in ENSO.These internal climate modes are internal drivers which can act to mute or enhance the underlying warming trend from higher CO2, they cannot and do not explain the fact that the planet is in a net positive energy imbalance (Murphy et al. 2009). How can the climate scientists you and the skeptics are chastising be indifferent to these internal climate modes and oscillations when they have published papers specifically to investigate their role? Please think about this the skeptics love to make unsubstantiated and unsupported claims, because they know they cannot back them up. What does count in this game of skeptics is rhetoric, innuendo and opinions, not facts.This is yet another astounding example of the media failing us. To say I am disappointed by your partisan and uncritical and error riddled piece would be a gross understatement.I would complain to your editors, but previous experience has shown me that NewScientist has no interest in acknowledging or retracting errors on the climate file, especially it seems when those errors are made by you.For what it is worth I urge you to please correct the errors pointed out to you here and to revise or retract your piece. Thank you.
 
I'm having tlorbue posting an idea through the Post Submissions' form. I keep getting the following error: Failed to send your message. Please try later or contact administrator by other way. Is there another way to submit an idea?
 
(copy of below was posted at Climate Audit. They are cenoirsng my posts but allowing their hoi polloi to post immediately.)Ryan is a punk and a whiner for getting into the peer review stuff.He's also disorganized in his presentation of material and wastes too much time with emotional venting. If his submitted paper was anything like his blog posts (and McI's usually are) then no wonder it took him so long to get something shaped into publishable form.I've followed this kit and caboodle for 6 years now, but still find it a pain to look for what point you are making. Think how bad this looks to the intelligent outsider reading your stuff. If you want an example of people who do things right, look at Ed Zorita or that British blogger who's found some code glitches. They actually break things down and explain them. Not meander and vent and draw crappy graphs without axes and figure captions.As usual, there is an issue of McI changing two things at once and ascribing the resultant change to one. (Or glossing over his muddling.) Way better to have done the full factorial and presented it.And NONE of this exonerates ES. It's just that I can't even make out your point of technical disaccusation. I'm all for improving the science. All for taking down some liberal latte drinkers. But you guys screw it up so bad. You don't drive any understanding of material. You just have little social internet games.Perhaps Jeff contrail Id will flex his chest in happiness over the dramah or the Cold Fusion lovers at your ally Anthony Watts will just give you attaboys without trying to understand what the heck is going on. Probably Amac and Hugh will sigh at your disorganized rant.(cross-posted at Amac for post preservation)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top