Where the hell did I say that? Every example that you and your ilk have brought forward (all where I fully agree action would be warranted), probably constitutes less then 1% of all suits. That means that, stay with me here because this might blow your mind, that the other 99% of all suits might be bullshit! Now I personally feel that number is 99% but it’s way to fucking high regardless. Unless it’s a *clear cut * case of the doctor fucking up, they should be given the benefit of the doubt because medicine is far from perfect, despite what people seem to think these days. There are risks, bad shit happens, a combination of the wrong circumstances, no one is to blame, and no good comes out of crippling the system. Of course people won’t realize that until some lawyer asshole or politician loses a kid because they had to drive 5 hours to a hospital.
*I don’t feel it’s 99%
GL, actually I didn’t know you had gotten on this thread, I saw the G and thought it was Gawd. Plus, the first post didn’t say anything patronizing. Good to see you.
I already cited it earlier in the thread. Not directly, but it was included in one of the malpractice links. Ergo, I don’t have to look it up again. Work is done.
It does remarkably well. None of your friends have had bad experiences with doctors? Have they told you? Even down to “I didn’t like the way he talked to me”. Doctors have very long training periods for things such as this.
Lawyers cover for each other too. As do most fields. Doctors will not cover for someone who willfully is negligent or not good.
Yes. However, as mentioned, small trivial mistakes have large implications in this fields. Cutting off a leg is not a small trivial mistake, and yes, the doctor should be punished, not by an incredibly large sum of money.
Many mastectomies get replacement breasts now. This is plastics. They are fake, saline or silicone if you like, but at least they give some semblance of normalcy.
It isn’t you suing, it would be the child. The one “wronged” by some stroke of nature, exacerbated by parental “negligence” (failure to be tested). I’m sure she is a loving, wonderful child. Many parents, however shallow they are, don’t want them. Heaven forbid one come about because of IVF. You know some people would sue if such an incident happened, because they too would feel wronged due to some doctor’s accident.
But this gets into frivolous lawsuits instead of malpractice lawsuits. You aren’t going to convice me that a) large sums of money help lessen the suffering, and b) punishing the doctor monetarily helps any more than punishing them by license loss/probation, extra training, etc. If punishment by money works, why not just make murderers pay, instead of going to jail? Oh yeah, because they aren’t insured, so you wouldn’t get any of the money. (I realize OJ was punished by money, but after an inept court case by inept prosecutors failed to find him guilty criminally). (He also had money, had he been a poor man who killed his wife, there would have been no $25 Million settlement would there).
Really? I have an “ilk”? Not by a long shot. These instances were brought up by qcomdrj. Along with those fabled 8 & 9 figure settlements. And I’m glad to hear that you think that these are instances where action was warranted. Now, perhaps you can show me where I said that every single instance that is sued over is worthy? I’ll wait. . .that’s what I thought.
And I stand by my assertion that doctors need to step the fuck up and accept responsibility for their actions. If that means (1%, I remember) that a doc cut off my left leg instead of my right, great. Similarly, if that means that a doctor fucks up and leaves a sponge in my knee, causing me pain and distress, his ass is in my sights. Again, doctors and hospitals are in the business of fixing/fucking up lives. They need to go to extraordinary lengths to see that they wind up in the former category. I’m willing to accept the risks, and if something really bad happens that absolutely could never have been anticipated, then let’s talk. But putting caps on suits isn’t (IMHO) the right way to go about fixing the problems. Because until we can arrive at a figure of fuck ups that we find acceptable, limiting damages seems to only make it easier for doctors to keep making the same mistakes.
Oh, stop that.
Once again, you’re taking the most extreme cases (wrong limb & tools left inside), which as I said before constitute a very slim percentage of all malpractice suits. What about the rest?
Or, limiting damages might untie their hands a bit, and lead to saving some more lives. The additional relief on the rest of the system would result in lower costs for all as well. The system is too far to one end of the extreme, it needs to be knocked back in the other direction a bit.
You think I’m kidding?
I was going to stay out of this hijack, but I just have to call absolute fucking bullshit on this…
Either you’re stupid or insane. Please, I beg of you, tell me what state you practice in so I never, ever find myself in your care. You fucking scare me.
My mother went to a doctor with oozing from her nipple. She had a complete exam and mammogram and was given a clean bill of health, some hydrocortizone cream, and the comment, “I wish all my patients were as healthy as you are.” When she found a lump during a self exam several months later, I referred her to my doctor, who, over the phone, refused to see her and sent her straight to a surgeon. When the surgeon walked into the room and she exposed her breast, his immediate comment was, “I don’t know how any doctor could look at your breast and not know, on sight, that you have cancer.” Surgery was scheduled for that weekend and she had a radical mastectomy.
She died 5 years later from the cancer which had matesticized to her lungs and eventually suffocated her to death.
Not that my father had any actual intent to sue, but having heard what the surgeon who eventually properly diagnosed her said, he inquired as to whether the incompetent moron who slapped cream on her breast had committed malpractice. The surgeon said that although in his opinion it was, he flat out refused to testify against the imbecile who misdiagnosed an obvious case of cancer. Lovely.
And no, she didn’t want a fake tit when she was done with surgery – she was too terrified that the fake sack of whatever would impede future diagnosis of possible tumors. Not every woman is OK with just slapping on a fake tit by introducing foreign objects into their bodies. She was more concerned with her health than her appearance.
Asshole.
Please read my last post to you. It doesn’t matter if it’s 1% or 100% of malpractice claims. That’s not the topic of discussion, not by a long shot. THose are simply the examples one can cull from memory or a brief search of the topic. That certainly doesn’t make the remainder of suit improper, frivolous, dubious or fraudulent. To think so is to be either ignorant of reality, to have one’s head in the sand, or to dream a little dream of a utopia in which Doctors never make mistakes that lead to malpractice.
Or, more likely it will lead to more mistakes, sloppiness, and abuses of a system that always assumes that a malpractice suit is brought on by motives other than the concerns of one’s health and the behavior/actions of a doctor. This is akin to assuming a rape accusation is false because it happens so often.
No, I think your cynicism has gotten the best of your judgement.
Sam
Oh, and before you go getting your panties in a twist, thinking I’m blaming the incompetent jackass for my mother’s cancer and/or subsequent death, I’m not. She very well may have died even if she’d’ve been properly diagnosed earlier, in spite of the fact that it’s well understood that early diagnosis is the key to survival.
What I am doing is disabusing you of the insane notion that doctors won’t cover for bad doctors. They will and they do, every fucking day.
Not to do much with the poo flying around, but I’m sorry for your loss.
Tennessee, for now. I said doctors don’t cover for other doctors. I said plastics replaces mastectomies often for a semblance of normalcy? Did I say it made them normal? Did I say that it is always done. It is rarely done in cases where the damage requires radical (into the axilla) mastectomies because of fear of metastasization. Typically they are over the muscle as well. If the normal breast is removed, there is no fear typically. Lymph only rarely crosses the midline, and there are two separate lymphatic systems. It is much safer. Usually there is a limit to the amount of time after removal before they will put in a replacement because of rechecking.
Plus, at the very least, you have to know that I certainly would call them out for mistakes, as I have said that ones who are negligent should be punished, not just those who are accidental. Therefore, I would assume that most people would feel safe. I certainly would testify to help pull the license or get serious retraining for that individual. I would have hesitations about testifying in a civil case involving lawsuits however.
Notice you didn’t say how long ago this was that the surgeon wouldn’t testify. I disbelieve that this happened in the last 4 or 5 years, as the AMA and local state MAs are seriously cracking down on this. Plus you could name the surgeon on the suit if you needed him there. This was a tragic example of a serious doctor mistake. Not what we are talking about for removing the wrong breast. Did you report the other doctor, because even if you didn’t sue, you did others a disservice by not calling him out on it.
Your father being 1, 5, or 10 million dollars richer wouldn’t bring your mother back, and would have less effect on that doctor than having his license removed. So as for helping with pain and suffering, it doesn’t work, and for punishing, it also doesn’t work.
And please don’t take my last sentence as being negative towards you, your father, or your mother. Your father thought suing wasn’t the right thing to do, if I am reading your wording correctly. He probably would have won had he done so. Your loss was unfortunate, but in this heated argument, sometimes we say things that are taken the wrong way.
I’d also like to add that I think you should plunk down a few bucks and stick around qcomdrj. Not because we’re on the same side of the issue here mind you, just that you seem (along with Shayna & GaWd I might add) capable of reasonable debate.
We can always use people like that around here.
Ditto.
And now that I’ve gotten sucked into this debate, I want to say that I sympathize with the plight of people on both sides of this situation. Both the doctors and the patients.
Clearly a mandated cap is not the solution. One size does not fit all. (We’ve seen some of the travesties foisted upon us in another area – mandated sentencing.)
Yet the current system with its sometimes outrageous monetary awards doesn’t seem to work very well all the time either. One consequence is that malpractice insurance is very expensive, which drives up the cost of health care, which filters down to schmucks like me.
I heard just last week, that people have the ability to sue the OB all the way until the “baby” is 18 years old. Is this true? If so, then that is ridiculous too.
Not sure if you knew this or not, but John Edwards (y’know, the guy this thread’s about) had a sixteen year old son who died in a freak tragic car accident. The kid wasn’t speeding, he was just driving his car when a gust of wind blew the car over into a ditch, killing him.
If Edwards was the ambulance chaser some say he is, sure seems like the car manufacturer who made such a light, fragile car would’ve been a great target for his moneylust. Dunno if the car was fragile, but were Edwards of a mind to, someone with his greed and understandable need fo revenge could have gone to town over such a lawsuit.
Did he? Not that I’ve found so far.
The more I read about Edwards as a person and his career as a litigator (when did “trial lawyer” become the preferred term, anyway?), the more I admire him.
BTW, people can read a bit about Edwards’ response to his loss and how it affected his career in this excellentLA Weekly profile.
I’ve heard something similar to this, but what’s even worse is the OB/GYNs that want out are still are vulnerable to lawsuits afterwards. So they want to bail out because they can’t afford to stay in business, yet they still would have to cough up $100,000 plus a year for over a decade for insurance.
Tell me that doesn’t suck!
Doesn’t prove a thing one way or the other. For all we know he could have looked into it and found he didn’t have a case, hence no lawsuit.
Just to keep you updated btw, the only person in this thread that has called him an ambulance chaser (me), has since rescinded that comment.
You bastard, how dare you call me reasonable! Reasonable? Never.
Sorry if I missed this in the heat of the argument.
Sam
Right, and for all we know he danced a jig at his son’s funeral thinking about the new house he’d soon be able to buy with proceeds from the potential wrongful death suit. But it’s extraordinarily callous to assume that’s what happened, isn’t it? How about presuming better intentions on his part, God forbid.
In any event, I thought it didn’t matter if he had a case or not. Don’t these avaricious lawyers just play on the emotions of juries anyway? Since when do facts get in the way of their greed?
Oops, my bad! I thought you rescinded it only to redeploy it in subsequent posts (such as the one with all the quotes from CSNnews etc.). In any event, even if you personally haven’t been using the precise term, the general accusation leveled against Edwards – his allegedly having earned millions off the backs of the unfortunate and/or greedy – seems to have continued apace.
(And not just by you, which is why I didn’t refer to you specifically. I guess I’m still trying to knock some sense into Knowed Out, who is notable by his absence.)
It’s not whether they have a case by the facts, it’s whether they feel they can win it or not. Perhaps he felt that even with all the sweet charm and junk science in the world, he still couldn’t win the case, so he didn’t bother to bring it. <shrug> I don’t know, I’m not a psychic, neither are you.
I haven’t really spoken much about him since I rescinded my comment, perhaps you missed the memo.
Damn! Nothing patronizing at all? I gotta get on that.
You’re gonna hafta show me an attorney who would touch the sort of case you’ve outlined, and demonstrate an instance of a case like this not being laughed out of court. Otherwise, I’ll hafta believe that you’re creating nonsensical crap in the hope that something will sound good.
Then you’ve never suffered. A good thing, actually. Congratulations. And the way that you’re describing this, you think that if someone removes the non-cancerous testicle, then he should have to go in for extra training. Do you realize how absurd that sounds? Oh! And you also think that fake breasts are equivalent to the real thing. Sweet merciful mother of fuck, man! Don’t ever practice in Kansas City MO. Please!
Or, it could allow doctors to relax their vigilance. After all, there’s now a $25K cap. And no offense or anything, but I kinda doubt that anything short of a total overhaul of the medical system is going to result in lower costs for anyone. Finally, you are correct that the system is too far out of whack. But setting caps on settlements won’t knock it back a bit, it will bury it in the other direction.
Well, I can hope.
Which is crap. There exists an anecdote proving you wrong on this thread, I have a couple of my own, and I daresay that a helluva lot of people do as well.
Good on you. You are not, however, every doctor.
But see, most people don’t feel safe. As to your testifying against another doctor: why on earth would you hesitate inre civil cases? Did the doctor fuck up? If so, he deserves to pay. In this instance, he not only fucked up, he fucked up big time. So he (IMHO) deserved to get his ass handed to him. That he didn’t says a great deal about the classiness of Shayna’s father. And your apology for the crassness of your post speaks to your gentlemanlinessism. Well played.
Inre the continued carrying of insurance for OB/GYNs:: Can’t tell you that. It certainly does suck. But what you’re proposing as a solution is just as mercilessly draconian, just against patients. This would not be a help.