Boston Legal Season 2 Episode 15  » TV  »
4.5
1 votes
Are you familiar with this?
Feel free to rate it!
  • Melissa already underwent surgery in order to correct the problem but it didn't work
  • I don't think it circumvents the commandment of the Lord on thou shall not kill


    • by ibizaspain
      TRUSTWORTHY

      followers:35
      follow
      Alan Shore was consulted by a former friend Feliz about a possible legal action. Feliz had a daughter Melissa who can’t smile. She had nerve damage from a car accident. Melissa already underwent surgery in order to correct the problem but it didn’t work. She had a bad time at the school because she has been teased mercilessly. Feliz wants her to get into Adams Academy for a fresh start. But when

      the admissions office met her, they declined her admission because she can’t smile.

      Meanwhile, Denise and Shirley is representing Amelia. The latter was raped two months ago and was taken to the nearest hospital which was St. Mary’s. After she was stable, her parents wanted her to take the “morning after pill”, a drug which you need to take to prevent getting pregnant. The law which requires this pill has a conscience clause that Catholic hospital may refuse the administration of the drug. Amelia’s parents asked their family doctor for the drug but during that time, it was too late because you need to drink after 72 hours. Amelia wants to sue St. Mary’s.

      The humor in this episode was the domestic squabble of Beverly and her ex-husband. Their pet cat was on ventilator and the ex-husband wanted to end the life of a cat. Brad helped ...


      • Boston Legal Season 2 Episode 15
      Beverly to get a court order. David E. Kelley’s fondness for peculiar plot like this is simply beyond compare. He is known for his bizarre imagination and this is no exception. You would really be anxious to know what they are dealing with by only to find out it was a cat. The clash of legal doctrines between Brad and the opposing counsel was facetious or giddy at its best.

      Shirley and Denise

      won their case. My opinion on the matter goes with the plaintiff. The idea has to lie on the choice of a patient. Like the thrust of Roe v. Wade, the woman has the full autonomy if she has to give in to the pregnancy. The pill is for prevention too and not to expel a fetus. I don’t think it circumvents the commandment of the Lord on ” thou shall not kill”.




  • Don't Be Nice. Be Helpful.

The review was published as it's written by reviewer in May, 2009. The reviewer certified that no compensation was received from the reviewed item producer, trademark owner or any other institution, related with the item reviewed. The site is not responsible for the mistakes made. 101905703090731/k2311a0519/5.19.09
Your use of this website constitutes acceptance of the Terms & Conditions
Privacy Policy