A question. Why was workman’s comp the only avenue available? (I’m assuming here) Wouldn’t negligence by the employer allow for a second lawsuit?
I agree that the system seems to be broken. But I’m not sure that capping awards is really a fix. That would, in effect, keep a lot of people from being able to sue in the first place (which I don’t think is an unintended consequece) who have valid claims of wrongdoing.
[/quote]
I’ll just add that my girlfriend and a few of her classmates were very interested in OB/GYN, but ended up ruling it out because they’ll most likely get the shit sued out of them.
[/quote]
I must question this. Are there any stats on the percentage of OBGYN’s sued? (would your friend really be that likely to be sued while not making mistakes?) Or could some really bad OBGYN’s be slanting the stats for the overall number of suits? I don’t know. I’m asking.
Funny that the OP hasn’t returned.
I also think it’s funny that all lawyers are evil and rich, but apparently most doctors are humble do-gooders Almost none are greedy or charge more than the absolute bare minimum for their services, and absolutely none make dumbass, negligent errors that cause irreparable damage to their patients. Indeed, most are country doc types who carry around a black bag to dispense perfect treatments, good common sense, and maybe lollipops for the li’l shavers whose destitute parents invariably pay the good doc with root vegetables and home-made clothes pins, cheerfully accepted out of the pure munificence of the doctor’s heart…
Whoops, sorry, I was lost in my lovely little fantasy world.
I dunno, I see nothing incriminating proven in any of those links World Eater included from the NYT, much less CSNnews or NationalReview (what, you couldn’t find anything from NewsMax, American Spectator and Drudge?). How strange that while approving of unidentified sources with axes to grind, World Eater pooh-poohs in-depth article from Washington Monthly as merely “heartwarming” … perhaps not the best turn of phrase considering that bit about that poor girl and 12 other kids who had their intestines sucked out by the pool drain.
“Pool drain?” Wait a minute … that’s not cerebral palsy! And the defendent wasn’t even a doctor! Okay, I’ve changed my mind totally, because OBVIOUSLY this whole Washington Monthly article is a lie! I mean, as is evidenced by dozens of posts on this thread, everyone knows John Edwards made his entire vast fortune* solely by hunting down CP patients, browbeating the hapless but greedy parents into blaming the invariably innocent and well-meaning doctors, and then successfully suing them in order to put them and their free clinics out of business.
- And compare this massive, ill-gotten-booty to George Bush’s impoverished hardscrapple background, not to mention “just regular folks” Dick Cheney’s kindly pro bono work for Halliburton.
Okay, I just strained my sarcasm muscle. The point is, I understand that some people here think most trial lawyers are greedy scum. But tarring and feathering Edwards as a scumbag while knowing nothing about the merits of his cases is, quite simply, fucking stupid and unworthy of the tradition of the SDMB.
All I know of Edwards is what I’ve seen and read about him – including that he’s a successful trial lawyer who helped his clients while earning a lot. He also seems to have a dry sense of humor about the stereotypes surrounding his professional. Combined with the other aspects of his personality/background that I mentioned earlier, he’s a very attractive package as VP.
Also … dude gave his son the middle name of Atticus, as in Atticus Finch from To Kill a Mockingbird. That alone gives him my vote! 
No. Where worker’s comp applies, a lawsuit against the employer is barred. That is an essential aspect of the WC system: worker gets a certain recovery for the injury, regardless of fault, while the employer’s liability is limited.
That doesn’t prohibit suits againt parties other than the employer, however. If somebody is hurt at work by a defective doohickey, the employee can still sue the doohickey manufacturer for making a defective product.
GawD,
I don’t hate him because he tried the cases. He was making a name and a buck for himself. The pool drain stuff was needed. He was born in Seneca, I went to Clemson (they touch). I dislike the fact that he may hold the future of medical liability in his hand (as a potential tiebreaker). I moreso dislike his history regarding said liability, as it leads me to believe he is not for tort reform.
Choie,
Not all lawyers are rich, some do really good works as PDs, or suing for the benefit of humanity. Some make it to the supreme court. Most of those are rich though. Not all doctors are poor country doctors who heal by holding their hands over people. However, not all doctors are as rich as people are lead to believe. Here’s a hint it’s not.
They’re not all poor, but with an average salary of 135K, and the number that make over a million, the median is maybe 10K lower. If you take an annual salary of 125K, paying off an average of 104K in student loans, and malpractice premiums running amok, then you can see why some of us are worried.
I don’t mean to get personal, Gawd, and I am sorry for your uncle. However, do you think $7.5 million would make him feel that much better after the first week. If worker’s comp actually did its job, then his salary from that point until his life ends should be paid. I have no problems with medical malpractice doing this. However, as said before, making him an instant millionaire does not fix the problem.
Spooje, couldn’t find it exactly, still looking. Page 25 of this shows that 65% of WVa doctors are considering other states due to lawsuits. Page 27 shows that 47% of doctors that other doctors knew were changing specialties were OB/GYN.
Yowza! An attorney that might not be a true believer in tort reform. I’d be willing to bet that a physician such as yourself is in favor of tort reform. All because of payoffs that you find obscene. Am I right? Does this come as some sort of surprise?
Not everyone thinks that doctors are all super rich. I daresay that they all do better than me, though. You seem to be torqued because Edwards actually did his job well. Is that the basic jist of it? If you’re really so upset, then work to change the laws (I imagine that you are) and don’t vote for Kerry/Edwards (this was foregone). Quite simple, really. And keep in mind that while you’re working to limit damages, I will be slugging away to stop you. That’s what makes America do what it does so well.
I’m confused how you’re getting that I’m mad at him for his job when I’ve said that I don’t like him because of his voting on one issue. However, since he is fairly liberal compared to the rest of the senate, I think there are more reasons behind it. Malpractice just happens to be what I am most vocal about. I am a member of the AMA and am working on this issue, as should anyone who feels strongly about any issue, join something that puts you together with people who feel the same. While you are busy slugging away trying to stop me from getting tort reform passed, I will also be busy trying to heal the sick, stop active dying, and figure out mast cell degranulation as it applies to asthma and ways to stop it.
I am in favor of tort reform as it applies to fields other than medical malpractice as well.
Oh, but it’s ok for it to be in the hands of Sen. Frist, whose family owns the the largest for profit Hospital chain in the country. Not only is his family worth billions, but the company (HCA) was under investigation for massive fraud and corruption until Ashcroft took over the DoJ.
Actually, funny you should ask. In protecting the rich, powerful corporations of California, that avenue is NOT open to workers injured on the job. One would have to prove gross, willful negligence, almost calculated to injure the worker to sue*. And of course, it would be difficult to get treated on the company’s dime and sue them.
Sam
*-IANAL, but my mother the doctor and my uncle’s work comp lawyer, as well as my work neighbor, (whom is an insurance lawyer who I consulted with) all said something to the same extent, I simply forget the verbiage used.
Please correct thyself. “…because of his perceived stance in voting on one issue.”
I haven’t yet seen a long line of bills pro tort reform that he’s knocked down, or the exact opposite. I’ve seen one single, solitary mention of some sort of state bill that he was opposed to, but nobody here has come up with info on the bill or why he opposed it, so he for surely gets a fucking pass.
And FYI, my boss has been admitted to the Supreme Court bar, is currently petitioning for cert on a fundamental right of all Americans, will never see a fucking dime of that money and sometimes doesn’t have enough money for the bills. Most of the Supreme Court bar lawyers we interact with on a daily basis are just like my employer: solo practitioners trying cases that will never, ever pay off for principles of the US Constitution.
So before you label lawyers practicing at that level of law as “rich”, do some research. Or, to paraphrase you, “if you don’t know, don’t comment”. I wish he was as rich as you claim most Supreme Court lawyers to be. Then maybe I’d get paid a decent wage.
Sam
P.S.- Spooje- I see Minty Green got to the info long before I did.
Cool. So there’ll be at least somebody too busy to fight hard. Everything is falling into place.
Really. Which fields?
Perhaps automobile rental…
Well, wrongful death for one. And pretty much all lawsuits that for some reason are awarded punitive damages in the 7, 8, and even 9 figure range. Or the $6 Billion settlement against GM that was reduced by a judge with some sense.
Oh, and I didn’t mean supreme court bar lawyers, I have no clue what they are or what they do. I was implying the justices. They were lawyers once. My mistake for not being clear. If they are what you say they are, then perhaps they are the only lawyers who really do fight only the good fight.
As for my perceived notions of his disinterest in tort reform, you’re correct. I am conjecturing, but seeing as how he had very large settlements as a lawyer and probably thought them as good, I don’t see how he would go against his background.
You have a cite to show a lot of damage awards in the 8 and 9 figure range? Median, rather than mean, stats are preferred.
Why do I need a cite to say that I think all damages of that number are excessive? One should be enough for people to say, that’s not good.
Median for wrongful death is $2.2 Million. Says this . Interestingly, it says the mean has gone down while the median has gone up. As best as I can see, they aren’t affiliated with any particular partisan group, but feel free to correct/lambaste/ridicule me if wrong.
Because you’ve been talking out your ass for the duration of your participation in this thread, and have regularly spewed vitriol, implied that you know how the challenging veep will react in a specific situation and not as of yet backed most of those assertions up with anything but conjecture or sarcasm.
In a nutshell…
Sam
I don’t know about about the percentages of them getting sued, but I do know that they have far and above the highest insurance premiums, because they are considered high risk. One of the reasons is because if there’s some sort of fuckup, the costs of lifetime treatment ain’t cheap. I tried to do a little more searching for you, but the engines were turning up too much crap to wade through.
So you have nothing to prove that 8 and 9 figure awards are normal. In fact, you note that the mean average has declined, most likely indicating that high damage awards are not as prevalent as before.
Christ Sam, Edwards was a trial lawyer, and many of the people who are currently making money in the same fashion he did, are giving him loads of money. Is it so mine boggling to extrapolate that he’ll make sure they’re taken care of when in office? Just so I have to spell it out for you, taken care of = making small subtle maneuvers to insure things stay how they currently are.
Bush and Cheney hooked up the oil boys, Kerry and Edwards will hook up the ketchup makers/Lawyers.
Well Gawd, other people feel the same way I do.
And, he voted “Nay” for the S.11 Patients First Act. http://www.aans.org/library/Article.aspx?ArticleId=18627
Proving they aren’t normal doesn’t mean its not bad. I didn’t say they were normal. I said I am againstall awards that high. Cannibals aren’t the norm. Find out how many of those there are running around. Do you still want them around just because they aren’t common enough to warrant constant vigilance?