SOME IMPORTANT QUESTIONS:
1. What is SA's REAL purpose?
They claim to have a goal of providing the best "standby, stabilization and transport" services, in the land, but after more than five years and six million dollars, they've failed at that, miserably.
2. Why is SA working toward vitrification, which is a very complex procedure, when they do not even have personnel capable of performing the washout procedure, which is simple, by comparison?
They are trying to run, when they can't even crawl.
3. Why has SA's website never been up-to-date, and why are their news bulletins so infrequent?
The contract for the website was signed in July 2006, between SA and Manhattan Text and Graphics, a partnership owned by Platt and his girlfriend. Fourteen months later, there are still pages under construction and many of the other pages are not up-to-date. Typos that were mentioned by SA personnel, at the time the website was first posted, are still there.
In my opinion, Platt approaches the SA website in the same self-serving way he approaches everything. Aschwin and I asked Saul, on numerous occasions why Platt had not posted the SA staff bios, when he had them for months. Saul said he didn't know why Charles had not yet done this. As I predicted to Aschwin and Mathew, the bios appeared within days after my resignation. Funny, how Aschwin's bio disappeared from the staff page on practically the day he resigned, when little else was being done to the website. (Don't let the fact that Aschwin worked with Charles on the SA case report be deceiving; I'm quite sure Platt hates Aschwin almost as much he hates me.)
4. Why does SA depend so heavily on consultants? Everyone at that facility, (other than Ms Baldwin, perhaps), knows Platt, (allegedly an SA "consultant"), has been in control of that facility since he arrived in 2004, even when other people have been named as managers. It should be obvious to everyone on this forum that Harris and Platt, (again, allegedly CONSULTANTS for SA), have entirely too much control of that facility. Should an SA "consultant" in California be answering accusations by a former employee/co-manager of SA, based on information provided to him by another SA "consultant"? I don't think so, yet that is what has happened. Clearly bizarre, but excellent proof of the fact that SA has SERIOUS leadership issues.
a. Why isn't Aschwin de Wolf's bio on the SA "Consultants" page, when the bios of medical professionals who can't be bothered to show up for cases are? I'm almost certain Aschwin has not requested to be omitted from the page.
b. When is the last time anyone at SA consulted with Peter Voss, who is on the SA "Consultants" page? Do they really consult with anyone on that page, other than Platt and Harris?
c. Why is Soard on that page when Platt says Soard's PhD is a "waste of paper on a papermill degree"?
d. Why isn't Todd Huffman's bio on the "Consultants" page? They announced in News Bulletin 10, five months ago, that he had signed a consulting contract.
e. Why is Mike Quinn, a person whom I believe has femoral cannulation experience, on the "Consultants" page, when Platt admits to not even calling him out for the recent case? It's my personal observation that there's little-to-no respect between Platt and Quinn.
f. Is Platt just using the credentials of these people, (most of whom he does not like, or respect), to impress visitors to SA's website?