I have no problems with suing IF the person can do a better job themselves
based on the problems. I DO want legislature passed that'll limit the amount
that can be gained. I think here in WI it's something like 100k, which is
alot better then the millions that people seem to get.
I'm also not sure if you've heard, but doctors here in the US can choose to
not see certain people. As a matter of fact I think in South Carolina some
doctors have recently chosen not to treat lawyers and their clients that
bring malpractice suits against them.
If it's so easy to tell people not to screw up and get it right then let's
see how you do here.
A man injures his wrist on broken glass. Which of the following structures
entering the palm superficial to the flexor retinaculum may be damaged?
Ulnar nerve and median nerve - A
Median nerve and flexor digitorum profundus - B
Median nerve and flexor pollicis longus - C
Ulnar artery and ulnar nerve - D
Ulnar nerve and flexor digitorum superficialis - E
I have a few more if you want to keep going too.
On Thu, 26 Aug 2004 20:20:31 -0500, "Phillip Schmid"
well seeing as flexor digitorum profundus is your deep muscle for
flexion, that would rule B out I think.
and as the Flexor pollicis Longus is a muscle of the radial side of
the forearm that to my mind rules C out.
Seeing as the flexor digitorum superficialis is a superficial muscle
of the palmar side of the forearm I'll rule that E out.
Seeing as the Ulnar is the bone extending from the elbow to the wrist
on the side opposite to the thumb in humans that would rule D out I
I guess that would really only leave A Ulnar nerve and median nerve
BUT, I could well be wrong seeing as I've got no training in that
field.. However I suppose another factor to consider would be the
trajectory of the glass and the persons definition of "superficial":
Do they mean:
a) Trivial & insignificant.
b) Concerned with only what is apparent or obvious
c) Apparent rather than actual or substantial
d) being on or near the surface?
But you're reading a post from a person who's language training is
not in medicine, but in the arts & engineering.
I'm not expecting my Jiffy Lube kid to know a Brachial Plexus from a
Acromioclavicular Joint. But you know damn well I expect him to know
the difference between engine oil & brake fluid when he's filling
"reservoir's" under the hood of my car. Plus if it was your Car that
had engine oil swell all the rubber in your braking system you would
expect compensation and not think that your right to sue should be
limited to the cost of a free oil change.
I expect the same from my medical "Professionals" I don't care if
they know the difference between a stoichiometric fuel/air mixture &
stichometric prose construction, but I damn well expect (and by the
way, pay) them to know the difference between a Scapula and a Clavicle
Hence. the basis of lawsuits for shoddy doctors. I admire and
respect competent professionals in all fields. I believe that
incompetent & fraudulent characters from any field should be removed
(*ESPECIALLY GOVERNMENT*) Lawsuits are an extremely blunt instrument
but until we get to see MD's medical school grades and patient
treatment reviews plus treatment results, it's all we've got to work
Want to stop lawsuits? Have a public rating system for doctors where
people sign waivers acknowledging their understanding of their
doctor's abilities & a "meat chart" for injuries (incorrectly
amputated arm $50K, erroneously sterilization of a young woman $25K
just my $0.02
It's D in case you were wondering. I was just using it as an example to show
that medicine isn't as easy as some people think it is.
I do think that there is a way to find out stuff about your doctor. I can't
honestly remember how but I think it has something to do with the licensing
I'm fine with people suing medical practitioners if they don't fix whatever
harm they've done. It's the extravagent amount of money that people get
suing doctors that I have a problem with. I can understand a little extra
for pain. I remember reading of a case in Germany where a lady sued her
doctor after surgery for leaving an instrument in her. I believe that she
got $20k for pain/suffering and the cost of the surgery to get the
instrument out. I think that's very reasonable.
On Thu, 26 Aug 2004 22:42:27 -0500, "Phillip Schmid"
Luckily for the public it looks like a medical career is not in my
I understand where you are coming from with regards to extravagant
settlement amounts but those tend to be a result of Jury Awards.
Do you honestly think the people that are on springer every day can
understand the difference between $100K & $1 million? After all it's
only 1 more zero ;-)
I think that Judicial settlements (with the option of appeal) are the
most reasonable approach.
Imagine you were the German woman with the medical instrument left in
you. Your career was going to be lingerie model & your fiance left
you after your 8 months of endless bitching about "the pain" You've
now got a 12" scar across your stomach that every subsequent guy will
see (and wonder about) the scar. This is assuming you've not got any
ongoing pain which limits your sex life.
Does the value of a used mini van sound reasonable? I suppose where
you live also plays a part. If you're in the middle of Alaska (or
perhaps Alabama) $20K might buy you a nice house, but in New York It
might buy you a dinner (plus perhaps a movie).
I'm thinking, keep the present system, lose the Jury awards and Thank
GOD that I'm not a Doctor.
That, to me, is 90% of the problem - the "Springer" mentallity that our
society has bought into, and it shows up in the juries.
(to reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
address with "x")
I'm sure the lawyers won't mind taking the money of incompetent doctors who
need a legal defense. Lawyers are much more fair-minded than incompetent
doctors, in my experience. I have lots of doctor friends. Only 1 has been
sued and it was for a relatively trivial amount and he admits a difficult
patient and paper work screw up did him in. He hasn't made the mistake
again. If a patient won't cooperate he shows him the door and he makes sure
he writes all his notes down immediately.
By the way, about 5% of the doctors are responsible for almost half the
malpractice awards. If the doctors policed themselves and took away those
bad doctor's licenses your rates would go down by about half.
I'm going to try to find that article, I don't think it was just the doctors
that were being sued that declined to care for someone. I also think it
wasn't for lawyers that just had one lawsuit under their belt but the ones
that advertise it. I can't say that I really blame them though.
There's a doctor a bit away from here that has quite a few lawsuits lining
up against him and because of those he's been under investigation by the
licensing board. I also think that patients have the ability to complain to
boards about their doctors. If there are enough complaints they investigate
and revoke/suspend licenses.
Somewhere here in Wisconsin there was a couple whoms' child died during an
illness. So they sued the doctor for misdiagnosing the illness (they won but
they hit the $100k limit). I've heard of lawsuits where a doctor was sued
after stopping at an accident to help it's victims. One of the questions
that med schools ask is "If you drove past an accident without any
responders there would you get out and help the victims knowing full well
that you could be sued?" I'd be wary of getting out and helping knowing that
if I screw up it's my head even if I save a life or lives. There is going to
be a point where the lawsuits get so frivolous that people aren't going to
consider going into that profession.
Recently in NC there was a car stopped at a stop sign and a 50 year old tree
fell without warning and killed the people inside. You don't cut down all
trees because that happened once. There are all kinds of anecdotal stories
out there about lawsuts. Most have been reversed on appeal and you don't
hear that part of the story from people who want riduculous limits on
lawsuits. When doctors do their job correctly they don't get sued.
Well, maybe / maybe not. About 10 years ago my Mother was
driving Her company car down a main street in the town
nearest where she worked. A large limb fell from an old oak
tree and smashed her car. Fortunately she suffered only
superficial injuries. Comprehensive insurance replaced the
car (the companies insurance, not the town's insurance). My
Mother didn't get any money from anyone (or ask for it).
However, the town promptly cut down the offedning tree and
all the other large old trees on that street that were on
the towns right of way.
With that one story I told before the family is trying to appeal the law
here to get more then the 100k. If they didn't take the child to the doctor
the same ending would have resulted. I could understand the parents getting
quite a bit more if he was involved in the death, but he wasn't. Once again,
if it's so easy stop going to doctors to figure out what's wrong.
Different people have different ways of defining correct. I have a knee
problem and I went to my doctor a few times and each time he said that it's
nothing. After about the 4th time I went to a specialist and he told me I
need surgery. Do I think that the first doctor did his job correctly?
Absolutely. Quickly? Not at all. There was another time when I was having
pains in my abdominal region and I went in but they couldn't find anything
wrong so they took a blood test. Within a few hours they told me to go right
to a hospital. They never found out what was wrong. Do I think that they did
that correctly? Not really, I'd like to know what I had. Quickly? Yep.
There's a tradeoff between following everything exactly down to the letter
and trying to do things quickly. You can try all you'd like to do both at
the same time, but sometimes certain events don't allow it.
Say you're having heart surgery and something goes wrong. Do you want the
surgeon to take his time or would you prefer that he kind of speed it up? In
a perfect world everything and everyone would work at 100% speed and with a
0% error rate all the time. If he doesn't move fast enough you'll die and he
gets sued by your family. If he moves faster and makes a mistake he gets
sued by you. If you can handle that kind of pressure, kudos to you.
Indeed. But even you've heard of insurance fraud right? I mean, hey..he's
got insurance..lets get him to get into an accident with us then we can sue
his ass off! There're people out there that don't care about anything but
In the end it's just hurting the people that pay for the services. If I get
sued for something frivolous and they win and my insurance goes up, I'm sure
as hell going to raise the cost of my services.
If I were you I would lock myself in a bathroom and never come out. A
friend of mine in the software business was sued for no decent reason at
all. Even though the contract said any suit had to be in NC the guy sued
him in California and thejudge refused to move it. My friend spent $90k on
lawyers defending himself and the guy drops the case the day the trial is
supposed to begin. If my friend refused the dismisssal the case would have
continued and who knows, maybe the guy would have won. So my friend lost
$90k out of his own pocket for no reason whatsoever and he did not have
adequate coverage for the risk. That is life. Like I said..... lock
yourself in a closet or bathroom and you won't get sued..... probably.
That sounds pretty damn bad. I remember one of my teachers, I can't remember
which one it is, said something like "If you haven't been in a lawsuit yet I
would really recommend one." If I were that person I'd probably try suing to
get the money spent back. Quite a world out there.
Motorsforum.com is a website by car enthusiasts for car enthusiasts. It is not affiliated with any of the car or spare part manufacturers or car dealers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.