Talk:John Murtha

Congressional Images

Over the next few days, we should upload as many images from Murtha's official website to Commons. (They are all Public Domain.)--Blargh29 (talk) 19:59, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

How inquisitive must we be?

His infection is heresay. Not only is it an unnamed source but that source did not examine Murtha. Is this potentially smearing the good name of the gallbladder surgery department of the Naval Hospital?

It just depends on how much a tabloid Wikipedia wants to be. Clearly, Wikipedia, at times, tries to enforce BLP so that it is not a rampant tabloid. But how about being extra responsible and not using heresay reports? I don't have an opinion except that I recognize that it is a potential issue.

It is possible that he had surgery then got the H1N1 flu and died. We have no non-heresay reports of the cause of death but one will probably surface in a week or two.

Keep in mind this ---- but declined to reveal additional details, citing his family's request for privacy and federal privacy laws. from http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/02/08/john.murtha.obit/index.html?hpt=T1

IF we want to have the highest level of reporting, consider not this:

Murtha was first hospitalized with gallbladder problems for a few days in December 2009, and had surgery January 28 at Bethesda Naval Hospital, where "doctors inadvertently cut Mr. Murtha's intestine during the laparoscopic surgery, causing an infection."[68] Due to the complication, he was again hospitalized two days later, and died on the afternoon of February 8, 2010, in the Virginia Hospital Center in Arlington, Virginia with his family by his side.[69]

but this:

Murtha was hospitalized with gallbladder problems for a few days in December 2009 and had surgery January 28 at Bethesda Naval Hospital. He was again hospitalized two days later, and died on the afternoon of February 8, 2010, in the Virginia Hospital Center in Arlington, Virginia with his family by his side.[69] The National Naval Medical Center did not release further details citing requests from Murtha's family and federal privacy laws.[69] Suomi Finland 2009 (talk) 20:02, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

• I'm comfortable with the text as written, which it cited to two WP:RS, the Pittsburgh Post Gazette and CNN.--Blargh29 (talk) 20:18, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
• I am also comfortable with the text as written, i.e. with the cause of death, which was published in reliable sources. Nearly everything said out of court is hearsay, so deleting on that basis would reduce Wikipedia almost to a collection of judicial transcripts. The privacy law (HIPAA) limits to some degree what the providers can disclose, but sources appear to be unanimous that the cause was a complication from surgery, specifically a post-op bacterial infection (not H1N1 or a bolt of lightning). I respect the family's desire for privacy, and the article does not go into any details concerning their vigil during his last days, but cause of death is generally public information even for private citizens, and especially for a public figure. Also, WP:BLP applies to individual persons, not a whole hospital department; besides, healthcare-associated infections are a very common cause of death in U.S. hospitals, so it says more about the state of American healthcare generally than about one particular department.TVC 15 (talk) 22:31, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Lets wait, this is not an opportunity to say something about the state of health care, we don't need to report these claims, we are lucky in that we don't have to sell newspapers, lets wait for the confirmed details and not report the she said he said reportedly that the doctor did it, its simple enough, he had an operation and went back in and died.Off2riorob (talk) 01:31, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

I'm not trying to sell newspapers, and I've added a link to CNN saying the procedure is routine and quoting a prominent surgeon (president-elect of the American College of Surgeons) saying the cause of death was "certainly...a surgical error." No one has denied it, so this isn't even a "he said, she said." The subject was a public figure, so the cause of death is definitely notable. According to the linked CNN article, Murtha "was admitted to Virginia Hospital Center's Intensive Care Unit because of major complications from surgery, the hospital [where he died] said in a statement."TVC 15 (talk) 02:12, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

I am becoming more satisfied that this is not a case of sensationalized heresay because more sources are reporting infection as the cause, not just a disgruntled patient's family. But there is also more because I read that the parliamentarian was so stoic that he was on his death bed for 3 days before seeing a doctor, which was way too long. If he was a complainer, he would have been complained after 1 or 2 days and he would have probably lived according to the TV doctor. Also mentioned more vaguely online..CNN.. If the patient begins taking antibiotics immediately when that happens, that could solve the problem, but if the perforation goes unnoticed and several days pass, the infection can get worse and result in death, Wu said....Another possibility is that the heat probe could have injured the intestine, and later the area that got burned could have opened up and leaked, Britt said...."At the end of the day, if you don't have it done and you have a diseased gallbladder, you're talking about a very high complication rate and a possibility of death," he said. Poor man. Suomi Finland 2009 (talk) 16:25, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

That source http://www.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/02/09/murtha.gallbladder.surgery/ also says that a heat probe could have caused it, not an actual cut. So saying it was a cut and saying that it was an unnamed source in Murtha's office is possible inaccurate.

Thanks for pointing out both of those; I had noticed them also, which is why the text evolved from quoting "cut" to saying "damaged" (whether it was a cut or a burn, it was "certainly...a surgical error"). However, the Virginia hospital record says he was admitted specifically for complications just two days after surgery, so I don't think it's fair to blame the victim for a 3-day delay that didn't occur.TVC 15 (talk) 18:55, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Is it really a surgical error? Complication may be a better word? See http://www.cnn.com/2008/HEALTH/07/17/ep.surgical.errors/index.html where surgical errors are like cutting off the wrong leg. A heat probe, whatever that is, might have a known adverse event rate. An earthquake is not an error. It is a known event that is known to happen once in a while. The whole point of this discussion is to be as accurate and scholarly as possible. It's easy to write tabloid type and shocking articles. Suomi Finland 2009 (talk) 16:18, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

The nice thing is that the article now follows this so no change needed. Wrap up discussion? Suomi Finland 2009 (talk) 16:22, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Yes - the article uses the words damage and complication, which accurately reflects the sources (they go into more precise types of damage, but the article needn't). The procedure is routine and the president-elect of the American College of Surgeons said the damage was certainly an error, so I don't think it's an inherent 'adverse event rate' or earthquake. Thanks for the CNN link on surgical errors, including yet more cautionary tales from American hospitals (other reports include amputating the wrong leg) and how to reduce the risk. OK to wrap up discussion.TVC 15 (talk) 20:51, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

• The whole thing is according to Bob who told Politico, BOB has no medical experience at all and politico is not the best of sources for detail like this, there is no benefit to the wikipedia at all to insist on having it in the article, Suomis edit was good, I made it a couple of days ago, when the results are out in a couple of weeks and it was something else completely you can all go, well it was in politico and bob said so and then you can change it just like in a real encyclopedia. I dispute its inclusion and Suoimi disputes its inclusion. Who is it here that actually supports the inclusion of bobs report to politico? Off2riorob (talk) 23:29, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
  • We should say what we have sources for. If the sources are inconsistent, we should mention the various reports. In any event, Politico is not the only source for Rep. Brady's statement, not that you have provided any reason to doubt that source aside from your personal distrust. Moreover, he doesn't have to be a doctor: that's just stupid. He spoke with Murtha's staff and his wife,[1] so let's not be silly about the value of his information. There is no reason not to note the story. -Rrius (talk) 23:55, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
  • Exactly, and the sources are all consistent in supporting the text. Rep. Brady being a longtime friend and fellow member of Congress, and no one having contradicted him, we (on the talk page, not in the article text) can reasonably infer that the outcome was foreseen and that the family wanted Brady to handle the inevitable press inquiries. Obviously the cause of death for a public figure is notable, and it makes sense that the family would rely on Brady, who is already a public figure and has a Congressional staff including a press secretary. The Virginia hospital said Murtha was admitted due to a complication from surgery; HIPAA limits to some extent what details the hospital can publish, but nobody has contradicted Brady's explanation, and the President of the American College of Surgeons corroborates it.TVC 15 (talk) 00:34, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

I tried to link Grandview Cem....but dont know how to make it go directly to the Johnstown gradnview page —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.255.46.89 (talk) 04:33, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

dead links

8 external links are not working. Could someone more familiar with the subject fix them? Mahanga^Talk 05:39, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

Political Views Section, Final Sentence

"This behind-the-scenes advocacy for the American Soldier has gone unheralded so far in the main stream media bent on reporting tabloid-style topics."

Tell me that's not in violation of some policy on objectivity. 69.142.203.121 (talk) 22:05, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

Neutrality tag

I don't see why there is a neutrality tag in the "Political career" section. The passage reads perfectly NPOV to me. ~BLM Platinum (talk) 12:36, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

Military career

I would think that Murtha's military service should get more than just a cursory description. When a well-known public figure has been decorated for valor in combat, it seems like the very least that should be done is to describe the event in which this happened. — Red XIV ^(talk) 21:36, 19 September 2011 (UTC)