"the frivolous lawsuit thread!"

[PingSpike]

We've become a litigation happy nation. Why? Everyone wants to get rich quick for doing nothing, but very few people are capable of doing so. And no one believes in any personal responsibility anymore. So they just try to sue their way to success.

How can you not see this as a problem Infohawk? One of the few things I've agreed with the Bush/Cheney admin on was that this litigation overload problem needs to be addressed, although their solution will do little but put a tiny dent in the problem and has considerable drawbacks. I was pleasantly surprised to hear Edwards outline a plan last night to address this that sounds feasible and that I feel could work.

People act like all these doctors are just trying to hoard money and are out to kill patients or something. If you sincerely believe frivilous malpractice lawsuits are in the best interest of everyone, I think you haven't looked at the big picture. Its not the doctors who pay out over their mistakes, its the insurance companies. And those insurance companies raise their rates in response to this, causing all doctors to raise their rates...and who pays for that in the end? Everyone. Every time some one makes a crap money grab like this, we all pay. Its a very big part of the growing problem with our health care costs.

No, we can't just stop this litigation all together because there are most definately legitimate cases out there that need to go to trail. But its a big problem that needs to be addressed. And although it got largely passed over in favor of hotter current issues like foriegn policy in last nights VP debates, I really thought Edwards had a good plan laid out to address it. At least, its the best plan I've heard yet.

 

[jhu]

Originally posted by: PingSpike
We've become a litigation happy nation. Why? Everyone wants to get rich quick for doing nothing, but very few people are capable of doing so. And no one believes in any personal responsibility anymore. So they just try to sue their way to success.

How can you not see this as a problem Infohawk? One of the few things I've agreed with the Bush/Cheney admin on was that this litigation overload problem needs to be addressed, although their solution will do little but put a tiny dent in the problem and has considerable drawbacks. I was pleasantly surprised to hear Edwards outline a plan last night to address this that sounds feasible and that I feel could work.

People act like all these doctors are just trying to hoard money and are out to kill patients or something. If you sincerely believe frivilous malpractice lawsuits are in the best interest of everyone, I think you haven't looked at the big picture. Its not the doctors who pay out over their mistakes, its the insurance companies. And those insurance companies raise their rates in response to this, causing all doctors to raise their rates...and who pays for that in the end? Everyone. Every time some one makes a crap money grab like this, we all pay. Its a very big part of the growing problem with our health care costs.

No, we can't just stop this litigation all together because there are most definately legitimate cases out there that need to go to trail. But its a big problem that needs to be addressed. And although it got largely passed over in favor of hotter current issues like foriegn policy in last nights VP debates, I really thought Edwards had a good plan laid out to address it. At least, its the best plan I've heard yet.

unfortunately, the repurcussions of such large payouts is that most doctors will be practicing defensive medicine. so that means more unnecessary tests that raise costs for everyone. there's really no point in taking a history if you're going to be getting a bmp, cbc, chest x-ray, ct, etc. anyway.

 

[Infohawk]

Originally posted by: PingSpike
We've become a litigation happy nation. Why? Everyone wants to get rich quick for doing nothing, but very few people are capable of doing so. And no one believes in any personal responsibility anymore. So they just try to sue their way to success.

Do you have any evidence this is the case?

How can you not see this as a problem Infohawk?

Because there's no reason to think what you say is true.

One of the few things I've agreed with the Bush/Cheney admin on was that this litigation overload problem needs to be addressed, although their solution will do little but put a tiny dent in the problem and has considerable drawbacks. I was pleasantly surprised to hear Edwards outline a plan last night to address this that sounds feasible and that I feel could work.

Exactly, the Democrats have a solution too. I am against the extreme measures some (corporate interests) want to take. There is reform in the law right now. People are just crying that the law is falling. Also, this is a state question too. If your state is behind, contact your representatives.

People act like all these doctors are just trying to hoard money and are out to kill patients or something.

I haven't seen anybody doing that.

If you sincerely believe frivilous malpractice lawsuits are in the best interest of everyone, I think you haven't looked at the big picture.

That is a strawman. Nobody thinks frivolous lawsuits are good for everyone. :roll:

Its not the doctors who pay out over their mistakes, its the insurance companies. And those insurance companies raise their rates in response to this, causing all doctors to raise their rates...and who pays for that in the end? Everyone. Every time some one makes a crap money grab like this, we all pay. Its a very big part of the growing problem with our health care costs.

Fetch me some hard evidence. There are alternative explanations on rising insurance costs. The rising incurance costs do not match the payouts and number of lawsuits which suggests they are not the cause.

No, we can't just stop this litigation all together because there are most definately legitimate cases out there that need to go to trail. But its a big problem that needs to be addressed. And although it got largely passed over in favor of hotter current issues like foriegn policy in last nights VP debates, I really thought Edwards had a good plan laid out to address it. At least, its the best plan I've heard yet.

Good. I liked his plan too.

 

[chess9]

Antieverything:

The question is, at what point do you pull a doctor's privilege to practice medicine? Right now, it is almost NEVER done. Very, very rarely. The doctor would have to do something willful in most cases.

I don't believe the state boards, which are run by doctors for the most part, have faced up to the challenge of properly disciplining the very few bad apples in their lot. (I want to emphasize that very few doctors in my experience are really bad enough to require discipline. Certainly no more than a few percentage of the doctor population.)

Vic: The guy's a butcher and that's a quote from the second doctor who said he hadn't seen such a bungled job in years. Yes, my wife's thankful she is now almost a cripple. Sheezh, get a clue..... This wasn't brain surgery or anything particularly high tech. Please let us know what you will be doing when the doctor removes your nuts instead of pulling out your tongue LIKE YOU NEED.

-Robert

 

[Infohawk]

Originally posted by: jhu

unfortunately, the repurcussions of such large payouts is that most doctors will be practicing defensive medicine. so that means more unnecessary tests that raise costs for everyone. there's really no point in taking a history if you're going to be getting a bmp, cbc, chest x-ray, ct, etc. anyway.

By defensive medicine do you mean ordering more tests?

 

[BaliBabyDoc]

John Edwards actually proposed a federal system similar to what we have in NC.

Plaintiff's attorney has to submit their complaint to either an "expert" or "expert panel" that decides if the case has merit (some offense occurred AND the action had a significant negative consequence).

If judged "meritous" then the case can be filed. If not, the attorney gets a strike. Three strikes and you permanently forfeit privileges to file personal injury complaints.

I have TONS of anecdotes about medical malpractice but I will just give the most recent one.

One of my mentors is leading researcher in dopamine receptors. He also founded a biotech company that has developed several compounds as potential treatments for Parkinson disease, schizophrenia, and other conditions mediated by dopamine signalling.

He developed atrial fibrillation three years ago after a trip to London. It resolved after a few weeks and he had been quite healthy until an episode two weeks ago . . . where he literally almost bit the bullet while teaching a class. He's married to an accomplished neurologist who promptly coumadized (drug that thins the blood to reduce clotting risk) him over the weekend (neurologist normally don't do this but hell it's her husband . . . her perogative). Anyway, he was admitted for diagnostics and cardioversion (fix the rhythm with drugs and/or an electrical jolt).

Several drugs are used for inpatient (in the hospital) clot control. Heparin is usually given by IV. It works really well but people usually don't go home on it. Coumadin is given by mouth so it's typically the drug people use at home. Aspirin also helps by reducing the ability of platelets to form clots. Other drugs are given to slow the heart rate; usually beta blockers or calcium channel blockers. These drugs also lower blood pressure.

Well one morning, my boss was sitting in his bed when a nurse came in offering another calcium channel blocker and more heparin. He refused b/c his wife (the neurologist) had checked his BP that morning and it was quite low. The resident physician (doctor in training) came in later and threw a hissy fit about the wife treating her spouse. She started to cry and my boss told the resident to hit the bricks. Later that day his INR (a standardized assessment of clotting time) was low normal for his treatment regimen. Repeat blood pressure assessments also demonstrated low to low normal BP.

Essentially, if he had taken the calcium channel blocker and heparin he would have dramatically increased his risk of having a stroke (due either to low blood pressure or inadequate clotting). As an attending neurologist his wife covers the Stroke unit at my hospital. Obviously, it's an outcome that she's quite vigilant against.

This is a brilliant man, extremely industrious. Three kids age 22, 2 years, and one still cooking. He was almost the victim of bad medicine. It's an unambiguous case and I can guarantee you that it happens every day in America.

No real harm was done (other than the resident's ego and the wife's feelings) so no claim should or will be filed. But clearly this MD is either incompetent or overworked. In either case, he is not being properly supervised. Contrary to GOPie logic, hospitals do CHANGE how they practice when they get sued for bad protocol. We need better healthcare and better training for healthcare providers. Lawsuits do not PAY for such improvements but they certainly provide an impetus for getting it done.

 

[daveshel]

Originally posted by: PingSpike
We've become a litigation happy nation. Why? Everyone wants to get rich quick for doing nothing, but very few people are capable of doing so. And no one believes in any personal responsibility anymore. So they just try to sue their way to success.

I remember a few years ago leafing through the Forbes (or maybe it was Fortune) magazine issue that listed the richest people in America. A number of them had 'lawsuits' listed as the source of their income.

 

[Infohawk]

Originally posted by: daveshel

Originally posted by: PingSpike
We've become a litigation happy nation. Why? Everyone wants to get rich quick for doing nothing, but very few people are capable of doing so. And no one believes in any personal responsibility anymore. So they just try to sue their way to success.

I remember a few years ago leafing through the Forbes (or maybe it was Fortune) magazine issue that listed the richest people in America. A number of them had 'lawsuits' listed as the source of their income.

So what? What's the matter with making money off of lawsuits? Somebody has to practice law.

Also, a lot of people who love corporations hate lawyers. Well guess what corporations rely on lawyers for everything. Lawyers are the oil in this economy. They make sure everything operates smoothly. Not all lawyers are litigators. Again, if you guys have a better way to resolve conflict, please suggest it.

 

[BDawg]

Originally posted by: jhu

Originally posted by: Infohawk
Okay you have 2. Now go and look for all the meritorious suits like the ones where instruments are left in people's bodies or they operate on the wrong body part.

We probably don't have special courts for them because there is not a need. Many states have special procedures and requirements to keep frivolous cases out. Most people are just overreacting because of the Cheney FUD.

i'd put money down that the number of frivolous lawsuits outnumber those with merit. name one ob/gyn or neurosurgeon (or any surgeon for that matter) who hasn't had to defend a frivolous lawsuit.

My dad is an OB/GYN who has never been sued. One person tried to, but could not find someone to represent her.

You gonna paypal me?

 

[daveshel]

Originally posted by: Infohawk

Originally posted by: daveshel

Originally posted by: PingSpike
We've become a litigation happy nation. Why? Everyone wants to get rich quick for doing nothing, but very few people are capable of doing so. And no one believes in any personal responsibility anymore. So they just try to sue their way to success.

I remember a few years ago leafing through the Forbes (or maybe it was Fortune) magazine issue that listed the richest people in America. A number of them had 'lawsuits' listed as the source of their income.

So what? What's the matter with making money off of lawsuits? Somebody has to practice law.

Also, a lot of people who love corporations hate lawyers. Well guess what corporations rely on lawyers for everything. Lawyers are the oil in this economy. They make sure everything operates smoothly. Not all lawyers are litigators. Again, if you guys have a better way to resolve conflict, please suggest it.

It meant by being a winning plaintiff, not by practicing - there were others who were listed as practicing.

 

[BDawg]

Originally posted by: BaliBabyDocThis is a brilliant man, extremely industrious. Three kids age 22, 2 years, and one still cooking.

Damn...is the current wife a trophy wife?

 

[BaliBabyDoc]

What's your point, daveshel?

I doubt the Walton's are tagged with "shipping America jobs overseas" and "closing the grocery, gas station, optometrist, drug store, and hardware store near you."

I doubt the hellspawn from RJR list "killing hundreds of thousands annually."

IMHO, the tobacco settlement was a debacle. Many states have wasted the money. Tobacco farmers are clamoring for billions to stop growing their killer weed. And a small cadre of trial lawyers made off like bandits. That's not justice. It's also not the way the law works most of the time in America.

Most trial lawyers work very hard and make a better than average income for their labor. But they do it by following the rules and winning meritous cases. The few lowlifes (or fortunate one) making mad bank off a few cases or the worst lowlifes that make money by basically blackmailing companies/individuals into paying settlements should not be the impetus for dramatic changes in our legal system.

 

[Infohawk]

Originally posted by: BDawg

i'd put money down that the number of frivolous lawsuits outnumber those with merit. name one ob/gyn or neurosurgeon (or any surgeon for that matter) who hasn't had to defend a frivolous lawsuit.

My dad is an OB/GYN who has never been sued. One person tried to, but could not find someone to represent her.

You gonna paypal me?[/quote]


LOL.

 

[daveshel]

Originally posted by: BaliBabyDoc
What's your point, daveshel?

I doubt the Walton's are tagged with "shipping America jobs overseas" and "closing the grocery, gas station, optometrist, drug store, and hardware store near you."

I doubt the hellspawn from RJR list "killing hundreds of thousands annually."

IMHO, the tobacco settlement was a debacle. Many states have wasted the money. Tobacco farmers are clamoring for billions to stop growing their killer weed. And a small cadre of trial lawyers made off like bandits. That's not justice. It's also not the way the law works most of the time in America.

Most trial lawyers work very hard and make a better than average income for their labor. But they do it by following the rules and winning meritous cases. The few lowlifes (or fortunate one) making mad bank off a few cases or the worst lowlifes that make money by basically blackmailing companies/individuals into paying settlements should not be the impetus for dramatic changes in our legal system.

My point is that if a publication is able to list winning lawsiuts as the source of income of several of the richest people in the country, there is evidence that we are a litigious society.

 

[BaliBabyDoc]

Originally posted by: BDawg

Originally posted by: BaliBabyDocThis is a brilliant man, extremely industrious. Three kids age 22, 2 years, and one still cooking.

Damn...is the current wife a trophy wife?

Eh, so so. If I had an Asian fetish I would say yeah but I'm a bit more selective. She's definitely a very good physician scientist so by definition she's bright and motivated. She's extremely nice as well. So I would say that counts . . . it does for him. Miscegenation produced a cute kid, too.

Congrats for your old man. I keep trying to tell people that good doctors (talented hands, mind, and communication skills) rarely get sued and essentially never pay claims. Unfortunately, the same kind of collective system of health care (really sick people in a pool with really healthy people) that's caused ALL premiums to rise . . . is happening with medmal insurance, as well. The problem is that it's a REALLY small pool. Accordingly, when someone starts pooping we all get dirty.

 

[BDawg]

Originally posted by: BaliBabyDoc

Originally posted by: BDawg

Originally posted by: BaliBabyDocThis is a brilliant man, extremely industrious. Three kids age 22, 2 years, and one still cooking.

Damn...is the current wife a trophy wife?

Eh, so so. If I had an Asian fetish I would say yeah but I'm a bit more selective. She's definitely a very good physician scientist so by definition she's bright and motivated. She's extremely nice as well. So I would say that counts . . . it does for him. Miscegenation produced a cute kid, too.

Congrats for your old man. I keep trying to tell people that good doctors (talented hands, mind, and communication skills) rarely get sued and essentially never pay claims. Unfortunately, the same kind of collective system of health care (really sick people in a pool with really healthy people) that's caused ALL premiums to rise . . . is happening with medmal insurance, as well. The problem is that it's a REALLY small pool. Accordingly, when someone starts pooping we all get dirty.

Even never being sued, his malpractice insurrance was still something outrageous like 40% of his salary. That's one of the main reasons he dropped OB last year. That and so he could have more time off to fly fish.

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: Infohawk

Originally posted by: PingSpike
Its not the doctors who pay out over their mistakes, its the insurance companies. And those insurance companies raise their rates in response to this, causing all doctors to raise their rates...and who pays for that in the end? Everyone. Every time some one makes a crap money grab like this, we all pay. Its a very big part of the growing problem with our health care costs.

Fetch me some hard evidence. There are alternative explanations on rising insurance costs. The rising incurance costs do not match the payouts and number of lawsuits which suggests they are not the cause.

got any evidence?

 

[BaliBabyDoc]

My point is that if a publication is able to list winning lawsiuts as the source of income of several of the richest people in the country, there is evidence that we are a litigious society.

Dude, you don't need that damn list to figure that one out. But is it possible that we have so many lawsuits b/c:

1) we've got a bunch of laws
2) laws are violated on a regular basis
3) regulatory agencies change "interpretation" of the law with every change in administration
4) there's money to be made in violating laws
5) there's money to be made if you catch someone violating laws

 

[daveshel]

Originally posted by: BaliBabyDoc

My point is that if a publication is able to list winning lawsiuts as the source of income of several of the richest people in the country, there is evidence that we are a litigious society.

Dude, you don't need that damn list to figure that one out. But is it possible that we have so many lawsuits b/c:

1) we've got a bunch of laws
2) laws are violated on a regular basis
3) regulatory agencies change "interpretation" of the law with every change in administration
4) there's money to be made in violating laws
5) there's money to be made if you catch someone violating laws

But lawsuits are not the result of violations of laws - that results in criminal prosecutions. I would guess that the factors would be more like:

1) we've got a bunch of lawyers
2) we've got a bunch of sensation-hungry media practitioners
3) big verdict lawsuits make sensational news stories
4) there's money to be made representing plaintiffs in big-verdict lawsuits

 

[bozack]

Originally posted by: Shelly21
There was a report done that big businesses actually have five times as much lawsuits compare to regular people.

I'm sure all the business lawsuits have merit.

as much merit as the woman who sued McDonalds for hot coffee? or the woman who sued disney for saying a character molested her and her child??...right

 

[bozack]

Originally posted by: Infohawk

It makes sense that big businesses would have more suits since they are so much larger.

and much more likely to pay out a settlement even when they do nothing wrong as they would rather not suffer the bad press....people know this and abuse it all of the time.

 

[PingSpike]

Originally posted by: Infohawk

Originally posted by: PingSpike
We've become a litigation happy nation. Why? Everyone wants to get rich quick for doing nothing, but very few people are capable of doing so. And no one believes in any personal responsibility anymore. So they just try to sue their way to success.

Do you have any evidence this is the case?

No, and I doubt an 'hard' evidence exists. I'm more basing that on my personal experience and cynical outlook than anything else. I should have thrown a IMO in there, my fault.

One of the few things I've agreed with the Bush/Cheney admin on was that this litigation overload problem needs to be addressed, although their solution will do little but put a tiny dent in the problem and has considerable drawbacks. I was pleasantly surprised to hear Edwards outline a plan last night to address this that sounds feasible and that I feel could work.

Exactly, the Democrats have a solution too. I am against the extreme measures some (corporate interests) want to take. There is reform in the law right now. People are just crying that the law is falling. Also, this is a state question too. If your state is behind, contact your representatives.

I think I wasn't clear there. Both sides thing is a problem, but I hadn't heard anything from Kerry/Edwards regarding it until last night. I thought while it was nice the Bush/Cheney camp was at least paying lip service to the problem while others seemed to be ignoring it, their solution was not a solution at all. I was happy to see party I was planning on voting for this election offer up something I could really get behind for once.

Its a state problem as well, yes, but certainly what goes on in other states does in fact have a spill over effect to the others. We are one nation afterall.

People act like all these doctors are just trying to hoard money and are out to kill patients or something.

I haven't seen anybody doing that.

A bit rash of a statement by me, yes. I had gotten carried away.

If you sincerely believe frivilous malpractice lawsuits are in the best interest of everyone, I think you haven't looked at the big picture.

That is a strawman. Nobody thinks frivolous lawsuits are good for everyone. :roll:

More of a typo there, I should have said sheer number instead of frivolous. Of course no one things pointless lawsuits are good. My fault, I've never been much of a proofreader of my own posts.

Its not the doctors who pay out over their mistakes, its the insurance companies. And those insurance companies raise their rates in response to this, causing all doctors to raise their rates...and who pays for that in the end? Everyone. Every time some one makes a crap money grab like this, we all pay. Its a very big part of the growing problem with our health care costs.

Fetch me some hard evidence. There are alternative explanations on rising insurance costs. The rising incurance costs do not match the payouts and number of lawsuits which suggests they are not the cause.

I did not say it was the only part. The skyrocketing healthcare prices are caused by many things, but please don't discount the contribution of this so easily. I sort of felt it was obvious that if one had increased costs, one would increase the cost of your services to account for them. Either that or abandone the business because it lost profitability...either of which would drive up costs in the end. That is merely how I see the situation. The burden is like sh|t. It always rolls downhill.

No, we can't just stop this litigation all together because there are most definately legitimate cases out there that need to go to trail. But its a big problem that needs to be addressed. And although it got largely passed over in favor of hotter current issues like foriegn policy in last nights VP debates, I really thought Edwards had a good plan laid out to address it. At least, its the best plan I've heard yet.

Good. I liked his plan too.

Good...but if you like his plan but don't feel that the problem exists or is a problem at all, as our discouse would lead me to believe...why do you like the plan to address it?

 

[BaliBabyDoc]

keeping it real

MEDICAL INFLATION DRIVERS:
Why the Skyrocketing Healthcare Costs?

For example, when the government programs such as Medicaid and Medicare reduce their reimbursement rates, providers generally compensate for their lost revenue by raising their prices, thereby shifting costs to group health and other private payors.
---
Rising inpatient costs are also largely due to increased use of more expensive technology and higher labor costs driven by the growing nursing shortage and hospital consolidation.
---
The increase in the number of physicians over the last four decades has been driven primarily by specialists. Specialists charge, on average, more than twice as much as primary care physicians and their numbers are growing at a much faster pace.

True, true, true.

Pharmaceutical companies earn some of the highest profit margins in the healthcare industry. Higher prescription drug costs can be attributed to increased utilization, price inflation and higher-cost drugs. Additionally, consumer advertising has driven pharmaceutical sales, yet companies have had to recapture these promotional expenses through pricing increases.

Sort of true. Due to the wonderful practice of offlabel prescribing . . . the unapproved (FDA) use of medications easily covers the entire annual costs of marketing or the entire annual cost of research and development.

New healthcare technology often increases healthcare costs, even when it lowers the unit cost of a service. For example, technology may make procedures less risky and less invasive, which makes them widely available and used more indiscriminately.
---
"These factors are primarily responsible for the rise in healthcare costs, thus driving medical inflation and heightening workers' compensation rates," said Dr. Marie Hatam, Medical Director for PMA. "Unfortunately, this is also compounded by other smaller drivers like general inflation, litigation and government regulation.

 

[onelove]

ah the perils of frivolous litigation. I have always thought the "mad max" system would be so much cheaper and so much more entertaining:

'two men enter... one man leaves' [repeat chanting]