Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: shrinkermd
If you look at the true picture, few doctors are ever sued for malpractice, few awards are granted, and very rarely are they representative of the kind that Edwards received. The ones making all the money on malpractice are those selling the insurance, not the lawyers.

If you curtail the damages awards, what you will really be accomplishing is encouraging the insurer to frustrate the person who has truly been damaged from being compensated. what they are attempting to do is create a situation where the insurer can increase the cost of seeking the award to such a level as to make it fiscally impossible for one who was damaged to pursue his claim.

7 posted on 04/01/2007 9:39:40 AM PDT by jdub
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: jdub
The ones making all the money on malpractice are those selling the insurance, not the lawyers.

The remaining insurers are typically physican-self insurance companies, that don't make a profit. You are either colossally misinformed or something far worse.

8 posted on 04/01/2007 9:59:59 AM PDT by FormerACLUmember
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies ]

To: jdub

jdub, I can only assume you are an attorney. Most doctors have been sued for malpractice, awards are out of control, and in most cases jury awards exceed coverage limits. I have limited the scope of my practice to limit my liability exposure, as have most physicians. Twice I have been called into an operating room emergently to save the life of a patient dying from a complication I had nothing to do with, and was sued both times, despite successful and uneventful recoveries. Makes me think twice about responding to such calls.
The solution to the malpractice problem is twofold: loser pays, and expert witness reform. Lets prosecute this "expert witness" whores and the plaintiff attorneys that lie their a$$ off for money. We don't need caps on awards, just a level playing field. As it is now the jackals have nothing to lose when they sue everybody in sight.


11 posted on 04/01/2007 10:39:15 AM PDT by razzmd
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies ]

To: jdub

The insurers are making all of the money. I am insured by a mutual corporation, as are most of the doctors in my state. So the "rich insurers" line is garbage. Malpractice insurers have determined that there are only two factors that determine a physician's risk of being sued - speciality and zip code. If you are a doctor that takes care of very sick patients and are in a plaintiff-friendly jurisdiction, you are screwed. Every neurosurgeon in Dade County, Florida has been sued, on average three times. Every neurosurgeon in Washington, D.C. has been sued. And if you know any neurosurgeons, they are the most competent group of physicians you will ever run across. They just happen to treat patients who often end up with severe disability, despite their best efforts.


12 posted on 04/01/2007 10:56:50 AM PDT by Toskrin (It didn't seem nostalgic when I was doing it)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson