And inhibit the lawyers' pocket books from continuing to grow at obscene rates, to the detriment of patients, doctors, busineses, and tax payers.
.
Posted on 07/26/2002 12:21:49 AM PDT by kattracks
Edited on 07/12/2004 3:55:58 PM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]
President Bush said yesterday that "grossly excessive jury awards" and "lawyers who are fishing for lawsuits" have caused doctors to practice defensive medicine, increasing the cost of medical-malpractice insurance and costing taxpayers billions of dollars each year.
"It is estimated that frivolous lawsuits drive up the cost of government health programs by over $25 billion every year. It's a national problem that requires a national solution," he told a group of medical professionals during a visit to a hospital and university in High Point, N.C.
(Excerpt) Read more at washtimes.com ...
And inhibit the lawyers' pocket books from continuing to grow at obscene rates, to the detriment of patients, doctors, busineses, and tax payers.
.
Any time somebody isn't happy with ANYTHING a company is doing, off to court they can go. Imagine how much THAT is going to add to the cost of practically everything in this country.
I am against that bill, period.
To see the full text of the speech, click HERE
A new local all-news channel in Charlotte carried the speech in its entirety and it was well-worth watching.
Imagine having a trial attorney in the Oval Office, i.e., John Edwards. God save us all!
Nor am I. I think he let's the HMO industry off way too easy on their share of the blame in this mess. Now if W and congress recinded the HMO act and put them on a level playing field as any other business in this country I would support that. But with the condition that the judical system in both criminal and civil courts be made to adopt layman terms and "We the people" once again represent our own grievances in these courts. Turn them back to what they were intended to be. Places where Joe Average could plead his or make case in a simple and CHEAP manner representing his own interest.
This should go for such items as lawsuits as well as things as simple as writting a will. This would be the best tort reform he could possibly do. Liability Caps? I can see it but on injuries if the cost to cover the patients future needs exceed the CAP then future needs should be the award.
But I promise you that this will never happen. Neither party is about to abandon the HMO money for their campaigns. And the HMO's love lawyers themselves as they pay them rather than the doctors due fees. A doctor will give up trying to collect from an HMO. A lawyer will get HMO money up front. A doctor wait for months and months denial after denial. Could HMO's be a huge factor in doctors losing money and the prevailing problem behind thie lawsuits? Think about it.
A person lets say has some signs of colon cancer. A prudent specialist would order a full scoping. But fisrt he must justify it as medical necessity. The HMO's shill Quack Medical directors says well I think the partial test is sufficent. It is less likely to catch early stage cancer but is cheaper.
Now the doctor is told to do the partial and the test is negative. A couple of months later the patient arrives at the hospital with extreme pain and GI bleeding. A STAT test shows advanced Colon Cancer likely terminal or treatable with extensive radiation and chemo.
So who should be held responsible for this? Well personally I think the HMO should pay through the teeth for it. As these decessions are done without the HMO's medical Quack Director even seeing the patient. The patient seeing his life savings gone and the HMO thanks to both political parties doing is an automatic innocent party not responsible or liable for their actions.
The patient is angry, the patient is broke, the patient needs life saving treatment and to secure some future for spouse and children. By the way the laws are now written who is left to hold responsible? Yea good old Doctor who has his hands tied by both the beloved HMO and the hospital and hospital board recieving kickbacks from them. But like I said. You will never hear this all too common and often real senerio coming from the lips of Bush or any member of congress.
What's worse is the senator who penned the Patients Bill of Rights and pushed it is a doctor himself. A specialist to be exact. His states health care system is in ruins thanks to HMO's which he helped secure federal funding for Hillary Care. He's as well a Republican so is his governor friend of the state who sat on any type of accountability or reform of this mess for the past 8 years.
And don't even get me started on the Mom & Pop drug stores HMO's have put under. It takes my pharmacy 6-8 persons to do the job three did just 9 years ago before HEY MOE took over the state's Medicaid System. Now is that saving anyone a stinking cent in health care? The extra employees are busy doing HMO forms and paper work.
That is a shot across bow for the greedy, anti-American trial lawyers! LOL
Folks, we have GOT to DUMP THE DEMOCRATS OUT OF CONGRESS THIS FALL! The Democrats are destroying the country, in every way.
Nicely stated opinions in your post. With an HMO, it is impossible to depend on the word of an MD as to what's best for the patient. It's "one size fits all" medicine, with everyone getting the cheapest medication. At the very least, physicians should have to give patients a list of medicines and procedures that one might consider, including a checklist of what the HMO covers and other options which the patient can choose to pay for. Put the responsibility for paying for more expensive choices on the consumer.
The same thing goes for natural alternatives, which the consumer pays for. The medical community avoids this threat to their monopoly, for the most part.
If a doctor or HMO withholds information about potentially more beneficial therapies, they should be sued. Look at this HRT (homone replacement therapy) mess. An acquaintance told me years ago that the stuff being prescribed most often was poison, and to demand the more expensive alternative or go natural. I assume that the medical community must have known about the concerns, but many doctors have unfortunately put their jobs above patient's well being.
So, why should the lawsuits be limited? The only thing the HMOs care about is profit (and the idea that they are profit making corporations is reprehensible, making money off depriving patients of the best possible treatment.); the lawsuits are going to have to be painful enough to affect the bottom line.
I also like Britain's 'loser pays' system---keeps a lot of greedy attorneys from filing nuisance lawsuits against innocent defendants.
There are laws against frivolous lawsuits, it is up to the judge to recognize them and throw them out of court. The latest law suit against junk food is just one of those and no self-respecting judge will let it take up his court time.
It is the hungry lawyers, and there are literally thousands of them, who will take anything for the publicity. These men and women who make a mockery of law should be censured or fined within the courts and a ABA warning, if they repeat these stupid suits, they will loose their license to practice law.
The trial lawyers were among the biggest backers of the Clintons just because they were assured there would be no caps; Bush will really have a fight on his hands but maybe the Doctors will come to his aid, it is their medical malpractice costs that is a great part in making all health so expensive. But they have to clean up their house also; throw out the bad doctors.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.