{THESE ARE STATEMENTS SENT WITH THE APPEAL 4-93-0847, AS A SUMMARY OF WHAT THE RESULTS OF THE CASE ARE EXPECTED TO BE}

AMENDED CASE 92-C-1222

APPEAL 4-93-0847

The opportunity to discover constitutional basis and LAW as it applies specifically to case 92-c-1222

The request: to receive instruction, by the court regarding SPECIFIC constitutional issues.

The question: Define, Bill of Rights, section 3 "that government is, or ought to be, instituted for the common benefit, protection, and security of the people, nation, or community...."

As it applies to: Jurisdiction between man/woman and/or corporate entity regarding the SIMPLE RIGHT to contest any inaccurate billing practice and/or bill in question.

As it applies to: The RIGHT of an individual to contest billing and/or billing practice which occurs WITHOUT, FREE ENTERPRISE DECISIONS (accident, emergency, etc).

As it applies to: The defense of a citizen, from monetary imprisonment due to matters which were NEVER, A FREE ENTERPRISE DECISION.

The question: Define, Bill of Rights, section 1, "That all mem are by nature equally free and independent, and have certain inherent rights....."

As it applies to: The right of an individual to contest errant/wrongful decisions through appropriate "peer review" OR by the court; in reasonable, but simple language.

As it applies to: Definitions, terminologies, or other, which significantly affect the personal freedom, and enjoyment of life and liberty and the pursuit of happiness. (terminology exists to label people NOT a definition of life, an encroachment).

The question: Define, the Bill of Rights, section 1 "inherent rights, of which, when they enter into a state of society, they cannot, by any compact, deprive or divest their posterity; namely the enjoyment of life and liberty, with the means of acquiring and possessing property, and pursuing and obtaining happiness and safety."

As it applies to: The reality that men/women DO lose everything, NOT by FREE enterprise, but by criminal abuse, accident, emergency and so on. It is allowed, even though medical bills (majority) are NOT FREEWILL CHOICES. Is it then correct, that a citizen UNDER SEIZE, IS PROTECTED?

As it applies to: The need for assistance, Is a citizen protected from needless loss of life and limb? (within reasonable boundaries)

The question: Constitution of the United States, "We the people of the united states, in order to form a more perfect union,....."

As it applies to: Law, Does a citizen have a right, the government an obligation, to redefine LAW, for the betterment of society?

The question: Constitution........."establish justice,......"

As it applies to: The right of each citizen to court proceedings and FAIR appraisal of services rendered.

The question: Constitution "we the people..."

As it applies to: Significant UNREST, DO to burdens placed upon men/women which clearly become oppression, without their freewill consent, through medical trauma! The significant reality is NEED VS POWER. The human body needs, the difference between health and loss of life, substantial wholeness, or the ability to work and thereby survive, IS/CAN BE dependent upon someone else. The DISTINCTION of power, comes only when this NEED enables or entitles specific persons or entities opportunity to greatly alter another persons' life. LIFE AND DEATH trauma for which, A REASONABLE CURE is exempt, (not available) is BEYOND a man/womans' intervention. Situations capable of producing adequate recovery, as perceived by the majority, are the decisions that apply.

A FUNDAMENTAL ISSUE therefore becomes: IS a citizen in medical trauma deserving of the designation "HOSTAGE" OR does citizenship have NO meaning here.

IF citizenship is a RIGHT, then fundamental defense is REQUIRED. That SHALL include: The right to proper treatment, the right to prenatal care, the right to FAIR billing and billing procedures, the right to appropriate emergency treatment IF facilities and staff are available (it IS a personal decision to live apart, a long distance from help). IF the citizen is a HOSTAGE, held within a situation, NOT as a result of, or chosen by, RATHER engaged in a physical, mental, emotional, and monetary war for their own existence by/from outside enemies, which restrict and control that citizens' life, THEN, IS THIS CITIZEN ANY LESS worthy of the pledge written within the Declaration of Independence "...and for support of this declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of DIVINE providence, WE MUTUALLY PLEDGE to each other our lives, our fortunes, and our sacred honor."

IS an internal fight for life, liberty, or the pursuit of FREEDOM, through HEALTH, any LESS, than the cause for these: the citizens' demand for equal protection, civil rights, educational guarantees'? The defense of a citizen, defines what governments are for. The reality of medical trauma IS: I AM ATTACKED!

IF justice is applied: WHAT IS FAIR?

Is it FAIR: To demand opportunity to contest any inappropriate billing or billing procedure in a simple dispute, when health allows?

Is it FAIR: To allow and require patients adequate voice and opportunity to describe their treatment to other patients within the hospital environment, public access, open viewed??

Is it FAIR: That billing MUST BE apportioned to wealth, this bill WAS NOT a free enterprise decision NOR desired, by free will choice (elective surgery does NOT apply). THEREFORE by percentage of wealth everyone shares, NO one loses everything? We are all equally at risk, we are all EQUAL as people, wealth must not divide?

It is FAIR: To walk away from treatment with dignity and honor intact, by accepting treatment and its payment at a FAIR SHARE COST?

It is FAIR: To believe that the poor and middle class, ARE THE SOLDIERS, PAY FOR GOVERNMENT, AND BUILD THIS SOCIETY, BECAUSE if they provide the BLOOD, SWEAT, AND TEARS; the rich can provide their FAIR SHARE, at least, in this one area? (if you make the money in this country, exiting to another country WILL NOT, eliminate your billed)!

It is HONEST to say: Every man/woman/parent who has found need for services provided by someone else has DIGNITY (which is: an honest desire to repay, and an equal opportunity to do so) UNTIL they or someone else, TAKE it away.

It is FAIR: To say to society, which DOES want medical services available that they MUST pay for EQUIPMENT which EVERYONE has access to, and buildings specific to need, NOT "gold plated".

It is FAIR: To describe the doctor, hospital Monopoly, as necessary, BUT, it is also FAIR to say MONOPOLIES ARE AND MUST BE, CONTROLLED BY LAW?

It is FAIR: To acknowledge medical staff as deserving salaries which reflect; STRESS, exposure to disease, unreasonable expectations and so on, BUT it is NOT FAIR for patient charges which DO NOT reflect time spent, results achieved, care given, WITHIN realistic wage parameters? This IS NOT A FREE ENTERPRISE SITUATION!

It is FAIR: That billing disputes are heard in a "public forum" atmosphere, WITHOUT LEGAL complications? To do this each side MUST publicly disclose their description of the facts. IF a fair settlement cannot be reached, THEN to court, But NO information obtained in this FORUM can be used within court because legal counsel was NOT ALLOWED.

It is FAIR: That NO INSURANCE be allowed for anyone within the aforementioned area's, those areas NOT covered such as; transplants, AIDS, (those medical problem's which shall not affect the vast majority) CAN BE COVERED, by insurance, NO personal insurance means, pain relief, But NO heroic's. It is an HONEST evaluation, the money will go to research for an adequate cure, rather than a painful, expensive and short extension of life in BONDAGE?

It is FAIR: TO REQUIRE every not-for-profit organization to establish and maintain an OPEN, EASY ACCESS method of accounting WITH FREE PUBLIC ACCESS at all/for all area's they oversee NO EXCEPTIONS. FAILURE to control cash, giveaways, or billing costs means an end to NOT for profit, status?

It is FAIR: To say those who appear at the emergency room door ACCEPT the necessary services they NEED, AND shall pay/owe for services rendered, at a FAIR RATE. DOOR signatures ARE A FAILURE of the court, as they are signatures UNDER DURESS and thereby INVALID? IF the patient can decide and make it known, they will choose, If they can NOT the medical staff determines? Children Belong to the parent(s).

{INFERRED: appearance at the emergency door, IS acceptance of the service}

It is FAIR: That everyone receives equal treatment IN ALL AREA'S, to do so means NO wealth is involved or described in any way throughout the hospital stay .

It is FAIR: To require a percentage of wealth to each specific operation, RATHER than a fixed rate?

It is FAIR: To cause doctors in a hospital environment, clinic, or multi-doctor, "business" to share? By causing/giving ALL PATIENTS the honest title of HUMAN BEING. THEREFORE, each has received the same treatment, paid the same, "fair share cost"; REGARDLESS of wealth, and those doctors who treat the poor ARE ENTITLED to the same reimbursement as those doctors who treat the rich?

It is FAIR: To acknowledge there are LIMITS, and to describe these limits to medical treatment within the reality of every citizen PAYS through the taxes which provide buildings, equipment, and services; THEREFORE every citizen has a RIGHT to expect these assets shall be reasonably kept and available when needed NOT SPENT, BUT INVESTED within physical realities which shall in return, HONESTLY BENEFIT?

{INFERRED: some people are past medical help, and should not be interfered with in their time to died}

It is FAIR: That the public shall VOTE 76y7y6upon what a citizens RIGHTS ARE as viewed within a medical catastrophe?

It is FAIR: That research money be apportioned to NEED? The greater the number of people afflicted by serious illness, the GREATER the percentage of money used for that research?

It is FAIR: To INFORM THE PUBLIC, about the RISK involved, in all experimental medicine, particularly altering genetic instruction? And then, allow the people to DECIDE BY VOTE?

Is it FAIR: For the U.S. government to demand less than the common citizen, OR is it RIGHT to say; IF the government acknowledges wrongful actions exist should they NOT be expected to rectify that matter for the PUBLIC, instead of for the government ONLY?

It is FAIR: That the common citizen, WITHOUT a police record, being involved in a violent crime should NOT NEED to pay the largest portion of their medical bill. That the largest portion of said bill DOES belong to the society and therefore the society through taxes MUST PAY?

It is FAIR; That institutions which train medical doctors and paramedics and staff, MUST open their doors to educate all who are capable and do demonstrate HONEST DESIRE?

It is FAIR: To say to doctors, nurses, and other personnel that the cost of THEIR education (NOT living expenses) will be ACCEPTED BY THE PUBLIC; But they will be asked to accept locations based upon public need for 5 out of the first 10 years of their working career? NO buyout, MUST work among locations chosen from at least 20 different possibilities? The price of tuition! PLUS a reasonable salary and housing.