-
We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.
Why is there controversy over Edwards being a trial lawyer?
Page 6 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Amused
Elite Member
Did 'Junk Science' Make John Edwards Rich?
By Marc Morano
CNSNews.com Senior Staff Writer
January 20, 2004
(CNSNews.com) - The superstar trial lawyer accomplishments of John Edwards, which allowed this former millworker to amass a personal fortune, finance his successful U.S. Senate run in 1998 and catapult himself into the 2004 race for president, may have been partially built on "junk science," according to legal and medical experts who spoke with CNSNews.com .
Edwards, who with a late surge finished second in Monday's Iowa Caucuses, continues to cite one of his most lucrative legal victories as an example of how he would stand up for "the little guy" if elected president.
Edwards became one of America's wealthiest trial lawyers by winning record jury verdicts and settlements in cases alleging that the botched treatment of women in labor and their deliveries caused infants to develop cerebral palsy, a brain disorder that causes motor function impairment and lifelong disability.
Although he was involved in other types of personal injury litigation, Edwards specialized in infant cerebral palsy and brain damage cases during his early days as a trial lawyer and with the Raleigh, N.C., firm of Edwards & Kirby.
Edwards has repeatedly told campaign audiences that he fought on behalf of the common man against the large insurance companies. But a political critic with extensive knowledge of Edwards' legal career in North Carolina told CNSNews.com a different story
"Edwards always helped the little guy as long as he got a million dollars out of it," said the source, who did not want to be identified.
The cause of cerebral palsy has been debated since the 19th century. Some medical studies dating back to at least the 1980s asserted that doctors could do very little to cause cerebral palsy during the birthing process. Two new studies in 2003 further undermined the scientific premise of the high profile court cases that helped Edwards become a multi-millionaire and finance his own successful campaign for the U.S. Senate.
Dr. Murray Goldstein, a neurologist and the medical director of the United Cerebral Palsy Research and Educational Foundation, said it is conceivable for a doctor's incompetence to cause cerebral palsy in an infant. "There are some cases where the brain damage did occur at the time of delivery. But it's really unusual. It's really quite unusual," Goldstein said.
"The overwhelming majority of children that are born with developmental brain damage, the ob/gyn could not have done anything about it, could not have, not at this stage of what we know," Goldstein added.
The medical and legal experts with whom CNSNews.com consulted said each case of cerebral palsy had to be evaluated on its own, but that medical science was increasingly exonerating the doctors involved in the labor and delivery where cerebral palsy resulted.
Eldon L. Boisseau of the Kansas-based firm Turner and Boisseau, specializing in defending doctors' insurance companies from medical malpractice lawsuits, agreed that physician-caused cerebral palsy "occurs only rarely."
"At the end of the day, I verily believe we will find [the cause of cerebral palsy is] all genetic," Boisseau said in an interview with CNSNews.com.
Dr. John Freeman, a professor of neurology and pediatrics at Johns Hopkins Hospital in Baltimore, Md., also believes there is little obstetricians can do to prevent cerebral palsy during delivery. "Most cases of cerebral palsy are not due to asphyxia," Freeman told CNSNews.com.
"A great many of these cases are due to subtle infections of the child before birth," Freeman said. "That is the cause of the premature labor and the cause of the [brain] damage. There is little or no evidence that if you did a [caesarean] section a short time earlier you would prevent cerebral palsy," he added.
'Heart wrenching plea'
But some of Edwards' critics say that as a trial lawyer, he relied more on his verbal skills than the latest scientific evidence to persuade juries that the doctors' mistakes had been instrumental in causing the cerebral palsy in the infants.
Edwards' trial summaries "routinely went beyond a recitation of his case to a heart-wrenching plea to jurors to listen to the unspoken voices of injured children," according to a comprehensive analysis of Edwards' legal career by The Boston Globe in 2003.
The Globe cited an example of Edwards' oratorical skills from a medical malpractice trial in 1985. Edwards had alleged that a doctor and a hospital had been responsible for the cerebral palsy afflicting then-five-year-old Jennifer Campbell.
'I have to tell you right now -- I didn't plan to talk about this -- right now I feel her (Jennifer), I feel her presence,' Edwards told the jury according to court records. "[Jennifer's] inside me and she's talking to you ... And this is what she says to you. She says, 'I don't ask for your pity. What I ask for is your strength. And I don't ask for your sympathy, but I do ask for your courage.'"
Edwards' emotional plea worked. Jennifer Campbell's family won a record jury verdict of $6.5 million against the hospital where the girl was born -- a judgment reduced later to $2.75 million on appeal. Edwards also settled with Jennifer's obstetrician for $1.5 million.
Legal expert Walter Olson, a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute and author of the book, The Rule of Lawyers, said Edwards' success in court was due in large part to his mastery of one important trait.
"Edwards was clearly very good at managing the emotional tenor of a trial and that turns out to be at least as important as any particular skill in the sense of researching the fine points of law," Olson told CNSNews.com .
"These are the skills that you find in successful trial lawyers. They can tell a story that produces a certain emotional response. It's a gift," Olson added.
However, Olson believes trial lawyers "have been getting away with an awful lot in cerebral palsy litigation," by excluding certain scientific evidence.
"[Trial lawyers] have been cashing in on cases where the doctor's conduct probably did not make any difference at all -- cases where the child was doomed to this condition based on things that happened before they ever got to the delivery room," Olson said.
'Junk science in the courtroom'
Peter Huber, a lawyer and author of the book, Galileo's Revenge: Junk Science in the Courtroom, believes juries are typically manipulated with emotional arguments to aid the plaintiff's case.
"The jury sees the undisputed trauma first, the disputed negligence second, the undisputed cerebral palsy third. It is a perfect set-up for misinterpreting sequence as cause," Huber wrote.
According to Boisseau, the growing body of scientific studies showing that obstetricians are generally blameless in cerebral palsy cases has done nothing to alter the trend of multi-million dollar court settlements. Those settlements are reached, Boisseau said, even though "a lot of the plaintiff's expert science is unsupported, essentially junk science."
Many juries never even get to hear about the medical science or the origins of cerebral palsy because "90 percent of suits for obstetrical malpractice are settled" out of court, noted Freeman of Johns Hopkins Hospital.
Huber does not expect cerebral palsy cases to fade away, despite the growing body of scientific evidence exonerating doctors.
"Despite the almost complete absence of scientific basis for these [medical malpractice] claims, cerebral palsy cases remain enormously attractive to lawyers," Huber wrote.
The judgments or settlements related to medical malpractice lawsuits that focused on brain-damaged infants with cerebral palsy helped Edwards amass a personal fortune estimated at between $12.8 and $60 million. He and his wife own three homes, each worth more than $1 million, according to Edwards' Senate financial disclosure forms. Edwards' old law firm reportedly kept between 25 and 40 percent of the jury awards/settlements during the time he worked there.
According to the Center for Public Integrity, Edwards was able to win "more than $152 million" based on his involvement in 63 lawsuits alone. The legal profession recognized Edwards' achievements by inducting him into the prestigious legal society called the Inner Circle of Advocates, which includes the nation's top 100 lawyers. Lawyers Weekly also cited Edwards as one of America's "Lawyers of the Year" in 1996.
'The kids and families I've fought for'
Edwards has shifted his emotionally charged speeches from the jury box to the presidential campaign trail and is fond of re-telling the story of how his firm sued on behalf of a cerebral palsy-afflicted boy named Ethan Bedrick in 1996.
Ethan, born in North Carolina in 1992, allegedly developed cerebral palsy after a botched delivery. Edwards has explained to audiences at presidential campaign rallies that suing Ethan's insurance carrier, Travelers Insurance Co., to cover the boy's physical therapy was necessary because "Ethan's family had no choice.
"[The family was] forced to go to court to get their son the care he needed," Edwards has said of the case, which his law firm won.
Edwards has repeatedly cited Ethan's case as an example of "the kids and families I've fought for," and in the minds of many political observers positioned himself as the classic David against the insurance industry's Goliath.
However, Edwards has also repeatedly failed to mention that he had represented Ethan Bedrick in a lawsuit against the boy's obstetrician a year earlier in 1995. Edwards had alleged that the doctor was negligent in failing to prevent the boy's oxygen deprivation during labor and therefore had caused the boy's cerebral palsy.
Edwards settled the malpractice case with the doctor's insurance company less than three weeks into the trial, enabling Ethan's family to get a reported $5 million for medical and living expenses. The case was reportedly the largest medical malpractice settlement in North Carolina history.
'I'm proud of that'
Edwards is not shy about defending his legal career and says he would gladly put his record up against that of President Bush in this year's general election.
"The time I spent in courtrooms representing kids and families against, you know, big insurance companies and big drug companies and big corporate America -- I'm proud of that," Edwards told the CBS news magazine 60 Minutes in December 2003.
But Edwards' critics have a different view of the man; they say he has repeatedly acted to enrich himself.
"John Edwards' spin is always -- I am helping the little guy. But he screened his cases to the point that he only helped people that were going to make him richer," said the CNSNews.com source with extensive knowledge of Edwards' legal career.
Dr. Lorne Hall, one of the physicians with whom Edwards reached a confidential settlement in a malpractice case involving cerebral palsy, agreed, telling The Charlotte Observer in 2003 that "[Edwards] knows how to pick cases, and he knows the ones he can win."
Hall said Edwards was "very polished, very polite, dressed to the T's, smiling at the ladies." But the anonymous source for this story said Edwards displayed a "belligerent attitude" toward the medical profession.
"He sued nurses, doctors, hospitals. The reputation he had was -- he never wanted to hear that nobody did anything wrong. If you even walked by the door of an alleged malpractice incident, you were gong to cough up money too," the source said.
But John Hood, president of the free-market, Raleigh, N.C.-based John Locke Foundation said Edwards tailored the evidence in his court cases for maximum impact.
"In pursuing his client's cases he did what many other trial lawyers do. He bent the available evidence to fit what he wanted to say," Hood told CNSNews.com . "That is the nature of an advocacy system," Hood added
Hood does not fault Edwards for the strategies he used as a trial lawyer.
"He was an advocate for his clients. It was his job to make the best possible case for them," Hood said.
Many legal observers agree that Edwards was simply doing his job and doing it very well.
A North Carolina newspaper, The News and Observer, said Edwards "forged a reputation as one of the most skilled plaintiff's attorneys in the business."
Retired North Carolina Superior Court Judge Robert Farmer, who heard many of Edwards' arguments in court, had nothing but praise for the abilities of the former trial lawyer, turned senator.
"He was probably the best I ever had in the 21 years I had on the bench. Lawyers would come in to watch him, to see what he does," Farmer told the Chicago Tribune in December 2003.
'Scientifically unfounded'
Olson said lawsuits blaming obstetricians for cerebral palsy and other infant brain damage "may constitute the single biggest branch of medical malpractice litigation." Cerebral palsy is diagnosed in about 8,000 infants annually in the U.S.
But the recent scientific studies may make those lawsuits "scientifically unfounded," Olson explained. He contends that the medical malpractice suits that enabled Edwards and other trial lawyers to become rich and famous are crippling medical specialties like obstetrics, emergency room medicine and neurosurgery.
"A few years ago every neurosurgeon in Washington D.C., had been sued, and it can't be because the nation's capital gets only bad neurosurgeons. It's because it's too tempting to file against the competent ones because so many terrible things go wrong with their patients," Olson added.
Edwards, who opposes legislation that would cap damages in liability lawsuits, would not respond to repeated requests through his campaign offices for comment.
By Marc Morano
CNSNews.com Senior Staff Writer
January 20, 2004
(CNSNews.com) - The superstar trial lawyer accomplishments of John Edwards, which allowed this former millworker to amass a personal fortune, finance his successful U.S. Senate run in 1998 and catapult himself into the 2004 race for president, may have been partially built on "junk science," according to legal and medical experts who spoke with CNSNews.com .
Edwards, who with a late surge finished second in Monday's Iowa Caucuses, continues to cite one of his most lucrative legal victories as an example of how he would stand up for "the little guy" if elected president.
Edwards became one of America's wealthiest trial lawyers by winning record jury verdicts and settlements in cases alleging that the botched treatment of women in labor and their deliveries caused infants to develop cerebral palsy, a brain disorder that causes motor function impairment and lifelong disability.
Although he was involved in other types of personal injury litigation, Edwards specialized in infant cerebral palsy and brain damage cases during his early days as a trial lawyer and with the Raleigh, N.C., firm of Edwards & Kirby.
Edwards has repeatedly told campaign audiences that he fought on behalf of the common man against the large insurance companies. But a political critic with extensive knowledge of Edwards' legal career in North Carolina told CNSNews.com a different story
"Edwards always helped the little guy as long as he got a million dollars out of it," said the source, who did not want to be identified.
The cause of cerebral palsy has been debated since the 19th century. Some medical studies dating back to at least the 1980s asserted that doctors could do very little to cause cerebral palsy during the birthing process. Two new studies in 2003 further undermined the scientific premise of the high profile court cases that helped Edwards become a multi-millionaire and finance his own successful campaign for the U.S. Senate.
Dr. Murray Goldstein, a neurologist and the medical director of the United Cerebral Palsy Research and Educational Foundation, said it is conceivable for a doctor's incompetence to cause cerebral palsy in an infant. "There are some cases where the brain damage did occur at the time of delivery. But it's really unusual. It's really quite unusual," Goldstein said.
"The overwhelming majority of children that are born with developmental brain damage, the ob/gyn could not have done anything about it, could not have, not at this stage of what we know," Goldstein added.
The medical and legal experts with whom CNSNews.com consulted said each case of cerebral palsy had to be evaluated on its own, but that medical science was increasingly exonerating the doctors involved in the labor and delivery where cerebral palsy resulted.
Eldon L. Boisseau of the Kansas-based firm Turner and Boisseau, specializing in defending doctors' insurance companies from medical malpractice lawsuits, agreed that physician-caused cerebral palsy "occurs only rarely."
"At the end of the day, I verily believe we will find [the cause of cerebral palsy is] all genetic," Boisseau said in an interview with CNSNews.com.
Dr. John Freeman, a professor of neurology and pediatrics at Johns Hopkins Hospital in Baltimore, Md., also believes there is little obstetricians can do to prevent cerebral palsy during delivery. "Most cases of cerebral palsy are not due to asphyxia," Freeman told CNSNews.com.
"A great many of these cases are due to subtle infections of the child before birth," Freeman said. "That is the cause of the premature labor and the cause of the [brain] damage. There is little or no evidence that if you did a [caesarean] section a short time earlier you would prevent cerebral palsy," he added.
'Heart wrenching plea'
But some of Edwards' critics say that as a trial lawyer, he relied more on his verbal skills than the latest scientific evidence to persuade juries that the doctors' mistakes had been instrumental in causing the cerebral palsy in the infants.
Edwards' trial summaries "routinely went beyond a recitation of his case to a heart-wrenching plea to jurors to listen to the unspoken voices of injured children," according to a comprehensive analysis of Edwards' legal career by The Boston Globe in 2003.
The Globe cited an example of Edwards' oratorical skills from a medical malpractice trial in 1985. Edwards had alleged that a doctor and a hospital had been responsible for the cerebral palsy afflicting then-five-year-old Jennifer Campbell.
'I have to tell you right now -- I didn't plan to talk about this -- right now I feel her (Jennifer), I feel her presence,' Edwards told the jury according to court records. "[Jennifer's] inside me and she's talking to you ... And this is what she says to you. She says, 'I don't ask for your pity. What I ask for is your strength. And I don't ask for your sympathy, but I do ask for your courage.'"
Edwards' emotional plea worked. Jennifer Campbell's family won a record jury verdict of $6.5 million against the hospital where the girl was born -- a judgment reduced later to $2.75 million on appeal. Edwards also settled with Jennifer's obstetrician for $1.5 million.
Legal expert Walter Olson, a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute and author of the book, The Rule of Lawyers, said Edwards' success in court was due in large part to his mastery of one important trait.
"Edwards was clearly very good at managing the emotional tenor of a trial and that turns out to be at least as important as any particular skill in the sense of researching the fine points of law," Olson told CNSNews.com .
"These are the skills that you find in successful trial lawyers. They can tell a story that produces a certain emotional response. It's a gift," Olson added.
However, Olson believes trial lawyers "have been getting away with an awful lot in cerebral palsy litigation," by excluding certain scientific evidence.
"[Trial lawyers] have been cashing in on cases where the doctor's conduct probably did not make any difference at all -- cases where the child was doomed to this condition based on things that happened before they ever got to the delivery room," Olson said.
'Junk science in the courtroom'
Peter Huber, a lawyer and author of the book, Galileo's Revenge: Junk Science in the Courtroom, believes juries are typically manipulated with emotional arguments to aid the plaintiff's case.
"The jury sees the undisputed trauma first, the disputed negligence second, the undisputed cerebral palsy third. It is a perfect set-up for misinterpreting sequence as cause," Huber wrote.
According to Boisseau, the growing body of scientific studies showing that obstetricians are generally blameless in cerebral palsy cases has done nothing to alter the trend of multi-million dollar court settlements. Those settlements are reached, Boisseau said, even though "a lot of the plaintiff's expert science is unsupported, essentially junk science."
Many juries never even get to hear about the medical science or the origins of cerebral palsy because "90 percent of suits for obstetrical malpractice are settled" out of court, noted Freeman of Johns Hopkins Hospital.
Huber does not expect cerebral palsy cases to fade away, despite the growing body of scientific evidence exonerating doctors.
"Despite the almost complete absence of scientific basis for these [medical malpractice] claims, cerebral palsy cases remain enormously attractive to lawyers," Huber wrote.
The judgments or settlements related to medical malpractice lawsuits that focused on brain-damaged infants with cerebral palsy helped Edwards amass a personal fortune estimated at between $12.8 and $60 million. He and his wife own three homes, each worth more than $1 million, according to Edwards' Senate financial disclosure forms. Edwards' old law firm reportedly kept between 25 and 40 percent of the jury awards/settlements during the time he worked there.
According to the Center for Public Integrity, Edwards was able to win "more than $152 million" based on his involvement in 63 lawsuits alone. The legal profession recognized Edwards' achievements by inducting him into the prestigious legal society called the Inner Circle of Advocates, which includes the nation's top 100 lawyers. Lawyers Weekly also cited Edwards as one of America's "Lawyers of the Year" in 1996.
'The kids and families I've fought for'
Edwards has shifted his emotionally charged speeches from the jury box to the presidential campaign trail and is fond of re-telling the story of how his firm sued on behalf of a cerebral palsy-afflicted boy named Ethan Bedrick in 1996.
Ethan, born in North Carolina in 1992, allegedly developed cerebral palsy after a botched delivery. Edwards has explained to audiences at presidential campaign rallies that suing Ethan's insurance carrier, Travelers Insurance Co., to cover the boy's physical therapy was necessary because "Ethan's family had no choice.
"[The family was] forced to go to court to get their son the care he needed," Edwards has said of the case, which his law firm won.
Edwards has repeatedly cited Ethan's case as an example of "the kids and families I've fought for," and in the minds of many political observers positioned himself as the classic David against the insurance industry's Goliath.
However, Edwards has also repeatedly failed to mention that he had represented Ethan Bedrick in a lawsuit against the boy's obstetrician a year earlier in 1995. Edwards had alleged that the doctor was negligent in failing to prevent the boy's oxygen deprivation during labor and therefore had caused the boy's cerebral palsy.
Edwards settled the malpractice case with the doctor's insurance company less than three weeks into the trial, enabling Ethan's family to get a reported $5 million for medical and living expenses. The case was reportedly the largest medical malpractice settlement in North Carolina history.
'I'm proud of that'
Edwards is not shy about defending his legal career and says he would gladly put his record up against that of President Bush in this year's general election.
"The time I spent in courtrooms representing kids and families against, you know, big insurance companies and big drug companies and big corporate America -- I'm proud of that," Edwards told the CBS news magazine 60 Minutes in December 2003.
But Edwards' critics have a different view of the man; they say he has repeatedly acted to enrich himself.
"John Edwards' spin is always -- I am helping the little guy. But he screened his cases to the point that he only helped people that were going to make him richer," said the CNSNews.com source with extensive knowledge of Edwards' legal career.
Dr. Lorne Hall, one of the physicians with whom Edwards reached a confidential settlement in a malpractice case involving cerebral palsy, agreed, telling The Charlotte Observer in 2003 that "[Edwards] knows how to pick cases, and he knows the ones he can win."
Hall said Edwards was "very polished, very polite, dressed to the T's, smiling at the ladies." But the anonymous source for this story said Edwards displayed a "belligerent attitude" toward the medical profession.
"He sued nurses, doctors, hospitals. The reputation he had was -- he never wanted to hear that nobody did anything wrong. If you even walked by the door of an alleged malpractice incident, you were gong to cough up money too," the source said.
But John Hood, president of the free-market, Raleigh, N.C.-based John Locke Foundation said Edwards tailored the evidence in his court cases for maximum impact.
"In pursuing his client's cases he did what many other trial lawyers do. He bent the available evidence to fit what he wanted to say," Hood told CNSNews.com . "That is the nature of an advocacy system," Hood added
Hood does not fault Edwards for the strategies he used as a trial lawyer.
"He was an advocate for his clients. It was his job to make the best possible case for them," Hood said.
Many legal observers agree that Edwards was simply doing his job and doing it very well.
A North Carolina newspaper, The News and Observer, said Edwards "forged a reputation as one of the most skilled plaintiff's attorneys in the business."
Retired North Carolina Superior Court Judge Robert Farmer, who heard many of Edwards' arguments in court, had nothing but praise for the abilities of the former trial lawyer, turned senator.
"He was probably the best I ever had in the 21 years I had on the bench. Lawyers would come in to watch him, to see what he does," Farmer told the Chicago Tribune in December 2003.
'Scientifically unfounded'
Olson said lawsuits blaming obstetricians for cerebral palsy and other infant brain damage "may constitute the single biggest branch of medical malpractice litigation." Cerebral palsy is diagnosed in about 8,000 infants annually in the U.S.
But the recent scientific studies may make those lawsuits "scientifically unfounded," Olson explained. He contends that the medical malpractice suits that enabled Edwards and other trial lawyers to become rich and famous are crippling medical specialties like obstetrics, emergency room medicine and neurosurgery.
"A few years ago every neurosurgeon in Washington D.C., had been sued, and it can't be because the nation's capital gets only bad neurosurgeons. It's because it's too tempting to file against the competent ones because so many terrible things go wrong with their patients," Olson added.
Edwards, who opposes legislation that would cap damages in liability lawsuits, would not respond to repeated requests through his campaign offices for comment.
BaliBabyDoc
Lifer
Well as a research MD I am indeed covered by my University's medmal but the University explicitly writes into consent forms that we accept NO liability . . . you read that right . . . the University accepts no liability for an injury or harm that may occur during one of our studies. Participants are fully informed of their legal rights during the informed consent process but if anything goes wrong the University's default position can be summarized as, "poop happens . . . not our fault" . . . regardless of whether it's our fault or not. Fortunately, trial lawyers will come to their rescue.
You are correct that any physician that's more concerned with how much money they make than the care they provide is probably worried about Medmal cutting into greens fees and Jag payments. On the flipside, some very good, very caring physicians are being priced out of markets due to exploding medmal costs.
Despite your lack of knowledge about medmal or healthcare in general you want to dismiss my perspective just b/c I don't pay mad cheddar for coverage. If I walk downstairs I could find you 20 people who would endorse some form of med liability reform . . . of course, that's the Surgery Dept offices . . . you know the ones driving Porsches.
The highest salaries in my dept (Psychiatry) are in the low 300s but none of them actually see patients anymore so they don't carry Medmal at all. The highest salaries at the University as a group are ENT but they've got average to low average medmal insurance rates b/c 1) you cannot work here unless you are the bomb and 2) ENT in general is a low-mod risk field. Radiologist have extremely low rates as do most pediatricians. Now if you are a vascular interventional radiologist then their rates are significantly higher . . . but so are their salaries.
Rates are linked most tightly to procedures and type of procedures performed. . . just like salaries. The more procedures (and advanced procedures) you do . . . the more you make, the more mistakes you make, the more likely it is you get sued.
A general practioner that does few procedures will make very little money practicing medicine but her medmal rates are very low. If the same doctor buys a scope (for sigmoidoscopy) and excises/biopsies suspicious skin lesions then her revenue will rise significantly . . . plus she will get a bump in medmal rates.
It's always been hard to make much cheddar as an obstetrician. It's potentially a high risk procedure (although most go without a hitch) but it doesn't pay very well . . . particularly with capitation by the evil health insurance companies. Now if you decide to be a gynecologist . . . then there's potentially mad money in coochie inspection/procedures.
Feel free to think as you like but searching for confirmation of your limited, recalcitrant position should easily be fulfilled:
NC physicians for medmal reform
Doctors for Medical Liability Reform
American Enterprise Institute
Heritage Foundation
Wow, is this kind of animosity prevalent between researchers and practitioners?
I don't begrudge doctors making a decent living. Afterall, it takes a great of education and training to become a doctor and most leave school with a boat load of debt.
You seem to have quite a dim view of your profession. I'm curious why.
Don Vito Corleone
Elite
No, you just begrudge lawyers making a decent living. Trust me, it takes a great deal of education and training to become a lawyer, and most leave school with a boat load of debt.
It's a good thing we have personal injury lawyers like John Edwards winning huge settlements related to cerebal palsy when science has determined that it's not caused by the birthing process.
Let's drive doctors out of the profession and raise medical costs for everyone. Yea!
You lawyers should clean up your profession and maybe it would have a better name.
Don Vito Corleone
Elite
Keep beating that same old drum, Rip, even though you yourself agreed there was nothing wrong with Edwards' role in that litigation. I never would have thought one could get SO much mileage out of a sentence fragment in a Wikipedia entry, but you are like a kitten with a ball of string when it comes to that infamous cerebral-palsy litigation. I bet you haven't done anything to research the scientific merits of those cases, yet you repeat it like a Hare Krishna repeats his mantra.
Interestingly, as you are conveniently ignoring, we have an actual doctor (or resident, I don't recall which) in our midst, who in fact lives in North Carolina, and he does not think medical malpractice litigation is "driving doctors out of the profession," nor does he agree that Sen Edwards' cerebral palsy cases were frivolous. You seem to feel that you know better. I think I'm being charitable when I say that's unlikely.
As you may or may not know, I am a military attorney, and while I have defended the government against med mal claims, including wrongful death claims, I have never been a plaintiff's attorney. As I have said here repeatedly (and you have agreed!), it's not the job of a plaintiff's attorney to represent every side of the story. In this instance it was Sen Edwards' job to zealously advocate for his clients, and he did so successfully. Ultimately, notwithstanding all your free-market principles, you want to see him stigmatized for his success.
You trolls should clean up your profession and maybe it would have a better name.
Edwards is benefiting from a system that is broken.
Let's fix it rather than feeding the beast.
Of course, most trial lawyers seem to be happy with the current jackpot justice system, and to hell with doctors who are being forced out of the medical profession and working families who have to pay more and more of their hard earned income for health insurance.
Let's fix it rather than feeding the beast.
Of course, most trial lawyers seem to be happy with the current jackpot justice system, and to hell with doctors who are being forced out of the medical profession and working families who have to pay more and more of their hard earned income for health insurance.
MONA CHAREN: EDWARDS IS NOTHING BUT A SMOOTH SALESMAN
[Fri Jul 16 2004]
Well, they got the hair part right. "We think this is a dream team," Sen. Kerry announced at his first joint appearance with John Edwards. "We've got a better vision, real plans, better ideas. We've got a better sense of what's happening in America -- and we've got better hair."
In the days before Kerry named his choice for the second spot on the ticket, commentators were saying that the importance of the event was not so much whether the vice presidential pick could carry a state, far less a region, but what the choice revealed about the decision-maker. This was immediately forgotten in the bubbly aftermath, when everyone seemed to be gushing about a "charisma infusion" to the ticket.
But let's not lose sight of the fact that John Edwards' charisma, such as it is, comes at the expense of substance. If Kerry wins, the man who stands a heartbeat away from the Oval Office will be a first-term senator who never held public office before 1999 and voted irregularly. But he has quite a smile.
This selection is a teachable moment. Some polls are suggesting that Edwards' background as a trial lawyer is viewed more positively than negatively by voters. The Republican Party should tackle that head-on. The commentators are swooning over Edwards' "two Americas" stump speech -- which disproves the common assumption that the one thing the press will not tolerate is hypocrisy.
John Edwards is a multimillionaire because he has extracted huge settlements in tort cases. Who pays the price for these multimillion dollar recoveries? Is it the corporate executives? Not at all. When juries hit up corporations for millions of dollars, executives don't see their salaries cut or their jobs endangered. Corporations simply pass along the expense to consumers in the form of higher prices. There is a tort premium on nearly every product you buy. To spell it out a bit further, it is the members of Edwards' "other America" who have paid the price for his success.
Edwards specialized in medical malpractice cases. The abuse of tort law in medicine has contributed to medical inflation (which Democrats then turn around and decry). Because doctors are spooked by the possibility of lawsuits, they order millions of dollars of unnecessary tests and procedures every year. And in some fields, like obstetrics, many doctors are bailing out altogether because the cost of malpractice insurance is so prohibitive. There are sections of this country where it is now impossible to find an obstetrician.
But this is more than a practical problem. It's a moral issue, as well. One of Edwards' specialties, on which he made millions, was suing obstetricians on behalf of babies with cerebral palsy. He mastered the emotional appeal to the jury. A signature line would refer to a brain-damaged child by name and then proceed with "Jennifer cannot speak for herself. She can only speak through me. She doesn't ask for your pity. She asks for your strength. She doesn't ask for your sympathy, but for your courage."
These "courageous" jurors would then come in with verdicts of millions against the doctor who delivered the baby and the hospital in which the birth took place. Edwards would pocket a third of the recovery.
Link
[Fri Jul 16 2004]
Well, they got the hair part right. "We think this is a dream team," Sen. Kerry announced at his first joint appearance with John Edwards. "We've got a better vision, real plans, better ideas. We've got a better sense of what's happening in America -- and we've got better hair."
In the days before Kerry named his choice for the second spot on the ticket, commentators were saying that the importance of the event was not so much whether the vice presidential pick could carry a state, far less a region, but what the choice revealed about the decision-maker. This was immediately forgotten in the bubbly aftermath, when everyone seemed to be gushing about a "charisma infusion" to the ticket.
But let's not lose sight of the fact that John Edwards' charisma, such as it is, comes at the expense of substance. If Kerry wins, the man who stands a heartbeat away from the Oval Office will be a first-term senator who never held public office before 1999 and voted irregularly. But he has quite a smile.
This selection is a teachable moment. Some polls are suggesting that Edwards' background as a trial lawyer is viewed more positively than negatively by voters. The Republican Party should tackle that head-on. The commentators are swooning over Edwards' "two Americas" stump speech -- which disproves the common assumption that the one thing the press will not tolerate is hypocrisy.
John Edwards is a multimillionaire because he has extracted huge settlements in tort cases. Who pays the price for these multimillion dollar recoveries? Is it the corporate executives? Not at all. When juries hit up corporations for millions of dollars, executives don't see their salaries cut or their jobs endangered. Corporations simply pass along the expense to consumers in the form of higher prices. There is a tort premium on nearly every product you buy. To spell it out a bit further, it is the members of Edwards' "other America" who have paid the price for his success.
Edwards specialized in medical malpractice cases. The abuse of tort law in medicine has contributed to medical inflation (which Democrats then turn around and decry). Because doctors are spooked by the possibility of lawsuits, they order millions of dollars of unnecessary tests and procedures every year. And in some fields, like obstetrics, many doctors are bailing out altogether because the cost of malpractice insurance is so prohibitive. There are sections of this country where it is now impossible to find an obstetrician.
But this is more than a practical problem. It's a moral issue, as well. One of Edwards' specialties, on which he made millions, was suing obstetricians on behalf of babies with cerebral palsy. He mastered the emotional appeal to the jury. A signature line would refer to a brain-damaged child by name and then proceed with "Jennifer cannot speak for herself. She can only speak through me. She doesn't ask for your pity. She asks for your strength. She doesn't ask for your sympathy, but for your courage."
These "courageous" jurors would then come in with verdicts of millions against the doctor who delivered the baby and the hospital in which the birth took place. Edwards would pocket a third of the recovery.
Link
Mothers given intravenous magnesium just before birth are much less likely to have children who develop the disease.
It doesn't appear to be the result of the birthing process as Edwards argued.
The number of C-sections has gone up around 4x since 1970, but the number of cerebal palsy cases has remained about the same.
It doesn't appear to be the result of the birthing process as Edwards argued.
The number of C-sections has gone up around 4x since 1970, but the number of cerebal palsy cases has remained about the same.
BaliBabyDoc
Lifer
Why do you insist on talking about something you know nothing about?! By the letter of the law, the cases Edwards' won . . . which is typically all of them . . . are not "alleged" birth injuries. A jury weighed the evidence and decided in favor of the plaintiffs. Now if you've got a beef with our system of justice then make a case . . . but thus far you sound like a shrill hack.
My first and only child is due in October. OBs that serve the hospital expressly forbid videotaping of deliveries. The birthing process is very simple . . . until something goes wrong. MDs save/improve far more lives than they end/impair. Unfortunately the culture of silence that exists in medicine means a well-funded trial lawyer is the only hope for a family that's been wronged. Settlements do not make people whole but it's better than the big pile of nothing.
Changing hospital culture would do far more to decrease adverse outcomes and lawsuits than medmal reform. Unfortunately, the lobby for better healthcare isn't nearly as well-funded as the MDs that claim trial lawyers are the source of all evil or the trial lawyers that feed at the medmal trough off the mistakes of a error prone healthcare system.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 24K
-
-
