A Few Words for Dr. Michael Parsa

Most Western European and North American social and medical systems operate under the primary ethical principle of autonomy. This principle allows the individual to determine the degree to which he or she will participate, or not, in any specific activity, including health care. For the patient to exercise autonomy, he or she must have a degree of understanding of his or her choices. Hence, medical providers have a subsidiary ‘‘duty to inform’’ the patient about possible diagnoses and obtain informed consent for performance of indicated tests. This allows the patient to consider a risk/benefit ratio meaningful to him or her.

8 Academic Emergency Medicine 12, at 1197.

The principle of autonomy and the duty to obtain informed consent are such commonplaces that the authors of that article didn’t even find it necessary to provide a citation: Rest. Obv.

How peculiar, then, that twelve years later one of the authors, Dr. Michael Parsa, should be sued for performing intrusive medical procedures on a patient against the patient’s express wishes.

(H/t Cath.)

About Mark Bennett

Mark Bennett got his letter of marque from the Supreme Court of Texas in May 1995. He is famous for having no sense of humor when it comes to totalitarianism.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

4 Responses to A Few Words for Dr. Michael Parsa

  1. Marc says:

    How ironic.

    I do hope the Medical Board doesn’t take a pass on this one.

  2. TW says:


    I want to applaud you for commenting on this more. Thus far, I have found more information concerning Parsa than I have Cabanillas (not to mention Portillo and Herrera). Can you do a separate post on Cabanillas? Thank you.

  3. Bill says:

    Either he was full of crap back then (not all that likely) or he slowly turned into a real Piece of S****. I suspect that what happens is that when the police bring people in, they are a ‘perp’ not a patient (as though the concepts are mutually exclusive). I’m sure he wouldn’t dream of doing this to someone that wasn’t in custody which if true, is the really troubling part. Fortunately, your blog has a lot of Google Mojo and he’s already becoming infamous – hopefully the fear of being a nationwide pariah will convince others that they shouldn’t become extensions of the police state.

  4. Bill says:

    Mark – a while ago it seemed like Radley Balko would post an occasional bit on Puppycide (cops killing someone’s dog, often on bad warrants) – then it seemed very quickly it was like every week. It seems like these incidents are happening more frequently in disparate areas. Do you think it’s a trend or is this just something fairly isolated b/c of how Texas has treated others? Killing dogs is one thing but it’s hard to see anyone, from a hard liberal to a law and order nazi type being ok with this. It seems though with infringements, it’s the slow boiling frog scenario – I sure hope not. Also it seems that in a lot of these cases, they could just wait and if there’s drugs, they’ll come out. I wonder if it’s b/c they can’t necessarily hold the person that they try to force the issue, knowing they can’t justify holding them for a day or so without a reason – so they try to rush it convinced they’ll find something? Kudos for pushing back man – thank God there are people like you.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>