how do you feel about such suits, when some are completely unnecessary and people like edwards are awarding thousands to millions of dollars worth of damage thus causeing doctors to go out of business lessening competition and forcing doctors to buy more liability insurance which results in raising medical and healthcare prices? are the magnitude of these suits right?
2006-12-28 17:58:54 · 5 answers · asked by mppuzzo 1 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
I feel if a Dr, is negligent or drugged up drunk he should be made to pay, but many times a Dr, is human and humans do make mistakes, I am not a Dr, but I do make mistakes , don't you??
we already know that Edwards is a crook who has made millions of dollars from suing Dr's product manufactures etc, he will automatically get 55 %of the suite plus he will charge the client $1,00 for each page of the case ,plus $100 per hr, for his secretary's time another $100 per hr, for his paralegals time and so much for incidentals so he will end up with about 70 %of the suite, and who do you think pays that money? you and I since the cost is passed on to us in the form of higher medical cost etc
I wouldn't vote for him for that one reason without the other problems he has caused.,running a state or gov is like running a business, are we going to keep putting crooks " lawyers" in our offices who have no idea of how to run a business or gov, don't you think it is time to wake up? have you ever seen a lawyer who was a successful business man??
2006-12-28 18:34:13 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
You are confsing medical malpractice suits with product liability suits.
In countries where such suits cannot be brought, or where remedies are inconsequential, incompetent doctors and venal manufacturers continue to operate.
If you can think of some other way to call incompetents to heel, post your suggestion.
As a statistical fact, only a tiny minority of victims of negligence ever collect anything, much less multi-million dollar judgments. And insurance companies are making more money than ever.
You are free to move to Texas or one of those other jurisdictions where there are severe limits to med mal judgments, and victims of negligence are left to charity and the lifetime indenture of their families. Or to here in Europe, where the State takes on the liability of caring for the disabled -- but not very generously.
Or to the rest of the world, the developing countries, where the disabled are left to carry on as best they can by begging.
Edwards' major case was against a swimming pool equipment manufacturer who, to save a couple of dollars per pool, failed to fit a filter on the water intake. Which then sucked out a little girl's intestines. It was a specific economic decision on the part of the manufacturer.
As for med mal, think of Bill Frist diagnosing Terri Schiavo based on her TV images. Or Sir Roy Meadows saying that "all" or "nearly all" parents of Sudden Infant Death Syndrome babies were murderers. And testifying in his haughty way and sending dozens of mothers to prison for murder. Only now we are finding out the Meadows was a charlatan. Or all those people who had the wrong, healthy kidney removed, or the good leg amputated.
2006-12-29 03:00:25 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I agree. If the doctor made a life changing mistake then I am all for it.
2006-12-29 03:05:57 · answer #3 · answered by Meg 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No I dont think its fare either but if someone is at fault they should pay for there mistakes if the reasons are good enough
2006-12-29 02:00:58 · answer #4 · answered by Marlene P 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
should be more.
most are swept away--hidden...
doctors-lawyers-police---....prob less than 1 % get to court.
95 % prob never even get a hearing....
2006-12-29 02:02:13 · answer #5 · answered by cork 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋