View Single Post
Old 04-03-2008, 07:08 PM   #28
creekster
Senior Member
 
creekster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: the far corner of my mind
Posts: 8,711
creekster is an unknown quantity at this point
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ERCougar View Post
If there was a medical mistake involved, I absolutely think there should be significant compensation. If you look closely at the original question, I wrote "regardless of the medical care involved". Many lawsuits are picked up without any regard to whether a mistake was made or not, but with an eye to the potential out-of-court settlement. All I ask is that someone with any sort of expertise in medicine take a look at the case to decide that. Why are attorneys fighting this? If it's not greed, I'm not sure what it is.
The answer to the question of whethger medical care was faulty is the ultimate question. If you are contending that suits lacking any merit whatsoever are settled so frequently and for such significant sums that they dramatciually effect malpractice rates I would like to see the support for such a claim. I highly doubt this is true. If it is true, then your carrier needs to suck it up and try a few cases, becaseu a case lacking any merit will be defensed.

More likely you are talking about cases that you think have little merit but becasue the damages are so significant the small risk of an adverse liability result makes doctors pressure theiur carrier to settle before trial. This is reasonable conduct, of course, and is based not on a claim that lacks any merit, but is based on a claim that may be hard to prove or not have much meirt but which a jury, using the reasonable person standard and applying the burden of proof, might find professional negligence.

This is a very complex issue, and almost none of it is as black and white as you suggest.

Quote:
The gross negligence standard is being tried in several states and has substantially reduced malpractice costs. That may or may not be desirable to you (I can see the argument against it), but it would decrease costs.
I am sure it does reduce costs. I don't like it, becasue I don't think an access issue (which is what we started this thread talking about) should be solved by denying compensation to vicitms of mistakes. But I also admit I have not studies this at all (I do not practice MedMal) and so could be persuaded upon reviewing the approaches that are tried and how they work.
__________________
Sorry for th e tpyos.
creekster is offline   Reply With Quote