No tort reform, no change

[cbi0090]

There isn't going to be any change in health care costs without tort reform, Period. It's going to take the acknowledgment that medical care is a vocation that is only as good as the people applying it and that people are not physically created equal. Any kind of medical care carries a degree of risk and the plaintiff side of the legal system has taken advantage of that to a point where the system is becoming paralyzed. The entire industry is a feeding ground for these parasites.
Of course, it's all done in the name of "for the people" and they are masters of telling you sob stories but the overall effect has done nothing but escalate normal health care costs to a point where few can afford it anymore. Health care is not the science everyone thinks it is. Nearly everything we know has been learned through trial and error and a lot of best guesses by experienced people who basically have to balance odds.

 

[editec]

What percentage of all health care dollars goes to insuring the HC establishment from lawsuits?

Do you know?

And if you do not know, then how can you possible be convinced that this is really the problem without having any metrics to measure it against?

Incidently I cannot FIND that number.

Rather odd, given that so many people assume that the cost of medical malpracitce insurance is such a problem that it is driving up the cost of medicine so badly.

so here's my question...see if you can find the answer:

Of the 18% of the GDP that is currently spend on HC, what percentage of the 18% is going to insuring practicioners against medical malpractive?

Until you can give us that anwer, your complaints are based on nothing but your impression that it's too high, agreed?

 

[midcan5]

I saw the numbers on this and they are meaningless. Cbi0090 is a tool who believes the hooey, there are lots out there. Some say education is failing, if education were evaluated on the basis of corporate tools and their repeating of nonsense then that education is a supreme success.

This quote is still accurate but substitute corporate think tank for state.

"If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State." Joseph Goebbels, Nazi Propaganda Minister

 

[cbi0090]

Next time you visit your doctor ask him or her what they pay in medical insurance, if they're willing. Most don't like to divulge it but if you know them well enough they might. It's a simple number that you don't need to look around the internet for. Now figure out how many patients he needs to see to pay for that. Notice how large his staff is and figure a big portion of their costs into the equation because most of what they do is keep records that are CYA in large part, not just bookkeeping. If they send you off for tests, figure how many really aren't needed but instead, again, are just CYA.
We're paying for a perceived risk that is very high and the more patients the doctor sees the more their risk goes up, while enforced pricing from HMO's, Medicare, and now a social medical system pushes prices down which means they have to see more patients pushing risk even further up meaning they have to see more patients, and so on and so on. As long as the risk is wide open there is no happy median. The only way to achieve one is to cap the risk.
It's just plain simple mathematics and has nothing to do with politics, but it has, of course, gotten politicized because it gets votes one way or the other.

 

[brownlou]

Medical malpractice lawsuits are capped at $200,000. in California. When a Cali doctor complains about malpractice insurance, they are full of shit. I wonder what other states have caps too.

 

[cbi0090]

I just want to add something more. I had the above conversation with my dermotologist whom I've gotten to know quite well. Now I'm a structural engineer and I have to carry professional liability, E & O, ect. for my business and am very familiar with standards of practice that anyone doing engineering must follow to the letter or you just won't be able to get insurance. You wouldn't believe the calculations and quality controls that are necessary and must be documented for things that common sense would tell you works. What should be a a simple decision or selection instead becomes many manhours of effort.
When I asked the doctor about whether his field had similar restrictions and standards that he had to follow, he laughed and was almost relieved to talk to someone who "got it." I found out that what I thought was a burdensome CYA waste of money and effort in my field, turned out to be a joke compared to what he has to go through.
At least for me, I'm dealing with materials of known or documented assumed properties and natural functions that have been well established in science both theoretical and applied. My doctor, on the other hand, has none of these advantages. Everything they know is based on observation and trial and error, no one person walking in the door is the same, probability and educated guesses play and big part in diagnosis and medications. Medical practice is more an art than a science.
His insurance bill is more than I make in a year and that doesn't even include all the other costs I mentioned above which he guesses triples or quadruples the amount.
My parents used to take me and siblings to the doctor and pay for the cost out of their pockets or over a short period of time. That was just 50 years ago.

 

[Political Junky]

What percentage of all health care dollars goes to insuring the HC establishment from lawsuits?

Do you know?

And if you do not know, then how can you possible be convinced that this is really the problem without having any metrics to measure it against?

Incidently I cannot FIND that number.

Rather odd, given that so many people assume that the cost of medical malpracitce insurance is such a problem that it is driving up the cost of medicine so badly.

so here's my question...see if you can find the answer:

Of the 18% of the GDP that is currently spend on HC, what percentage of the 18% is going to insuring practicioners against medical malpractive?

Until you can give us that anwer, your complaints are based on nothing but your impression that it's too high, agreed?

Actually, that cost from lawsuits constitutes a small portion of the overall cost of health care. I'll look for the figures.

 

[code1211]

What percentage of all health care dollars goes to insuring the HC establishment from lawsuits?

Do you know?

And if you do not know, then how can you possible be convinced that this is really the problem without having any metrics to measure it against?

Incidently I cannot FIND that number.

Rather odd, given that so many people assume that the cost of medical malpracitce insurance is such a problem that it is driving up the cost of medicine so badly.

so here's my question...see if you can find the answer:

Of the 18% of the GDP that is currently spend on HC, what percentage of the 18% is going to insuring practicioners against medical malpractive?

Until you can give us that anwer, your complaints are based on nothing but your impression that it's too high, agreed?

Is there malpractice mayhem in countries with nationalized healthcare? In Canada, where the health care system is now about bankrupt, one can sue.

I too don't know what the cost of this insurance is in the USA. I do know that there are tests that are performed to avoid the possibility of being sued. "Practicing defensive medicine" is the phrase here. Since insurance is paying for it, nobody objects. In a system where, like Canada, insurance costs are unnaffected by malpractice suits and resources are limited by funding, would these tests be perfromed? Would they be timely? Would the truly ill be treated on the same waiting list as the hypocondriacs?

I have asked the question before, if there was car purchasing insurance that worked like health care purchasing insurance and and everyone could get a Bentley every time they needed a car, how many people would get the cheaper model? This system of purchasing would cause a rise in the price of cars. It has no doubt done the same in medicine.

There is a cap on damages for malpractice in Canada of 100K. It's very difficult to prove and the low settlement award potential severely limits the number of claims submitted for trial. What lawyer wants 30% of nothing after costs?

PointofLaw.com | PointOfLaw Forum: Canada, where all are equal but some are more equal than others
Medical Malpractice Litigation - Canadian Perspective, The Role of the Medical Expert

 

[Bfgrn]

I just want to add something more. I had the above conversation with my dermotologist whom I've gotten to know quite well. Now I'm a structural engineer and I have to carry professional liability, E & O, ect. for my business and am very familiar with standards of practice that anyone doing engineering must follow to the letter or you just won't be able to get insurance. You wouldn't believe the calculations and quality controls that are necessary and must be documented for things that common sense would tell you works. What should be a a simple decision or selection instead becomes many manhours of effort.
When I asked the doctor about whether his field had similar restrictions and standards that he had to follow, he laughed and was almost relieved to talk to someone who "got it." I found out that what I thought was a burdensome CYA waste of money and effort in my field, turned out to be a joke compared to what he has to go through.
At least for me, I'm dealing with materials of known or documented assumed properties and natural functions that have been well established in science both theoretical and applied. My doctor, on the other hand, has none of these advantages. Everything they know is based on observation and trial and error, no one person walking in the door is the same, probability and educated guesses play and big part in diagnosis and medications. Medical practice is more an art than a science.
His insurance bill is more than I make in a year and that doesn't even include all the other costs I mentioned above which he guesses triples or quadruples the amount.
My parents used to take me and siblings to the doctor and pay for the cost out of their pockets or over a short period of time. That was just 50 years ago.

That is an outrageous statement and it is FALSE... a minimum of 8 years of intense science based schooling just to be a practitioner...no Art school I know...

From your own experience, you should be a BIG advocate of the President's investment in computerized medical records to reduce costs and improve quality. Then, to create a data base of best practices; to give doctors tools to make the best treatment decisions for their patients by providing objective information on the relative benefits of treatments.

You mention the word "insurance", yet you call patients that have their lives ruined by medical errors or neglect "parasites" instead of insurance corporations that promote personnel that find a way to DENY coverage...do you THINK those same insurance corporations "might" be milking doctors too?

Please provide a list of any structure you were involved in engineering...I will make avoiding them an "art form"...LOL

 

[Nik]

There isn't going to be any change in health care costs without tort reform, Period. It's going to take the acknowledgment that medical care is a vocation that is only as good as the people applying it and that people are not physically created equal. Any kind of medical care carries a degree of risk and the plaintiff side of the legal system has taken advantage of that to a point where the system is becoming paralyzed. The entire industry is a feeding ground for these parasites.
Of course, it's all done in the name of "for the people" and they are masters of telling you sob stories but the overall effect has done nothing but escalate normal health care costs to a point where few can afford it anymore. Health care is not the science everyone thinks it is. Nearly everything we know has been learned through trial and error and a lot of best guesses by experienced people who basically have to balance odds.

Except that the county with the most expensive healthcare costs in the nation have capped medical malpractice lawsuits.

Whoops. There goes that theory.

 

[Tech_Esq]

What percentage of all health care dollars goes to insuring the HC establishment from lawsuits?

Do you know?

And if you do not know, then how can you possible be convinced that this is really the problem without having any metrics to measure it against?

Incidently I cannot FIND that number.

Rather odd, given that so many people assume that the cost of medical malpracitce insurance is such a problem that it is driving up the cost of medicine so badly.

so here's my question...see if you can find the answer:

Of the 18% of the GDP that is currently spend on HC, what percentage of the 18% is going to insuring practicioners against medical malpractive?

Until you can give us that anwer, your complaints are based on nothing but your impression that it's too high, agreed?

I'll post this link as a source to answer your question about what the cost is. It appears to be based on a 2005 study. However, there is so much heat on this issues and so little light, I would say unless proven otherwise the study is suspect. Two powerful groups, doctors and trial lawyers are pitted against each other here. I would caution that you might want to think about it if you are siding with trial lawyers.

I'm of two minds on this issue. Having practiced tort law before in a state with limits on medical malpractice, I can cite you at least one instance where I believe the $1 million dollar limit was wholly insufficient compared to the damage done to the person.

On the other hand, because of the increasing costs of OB insurance in Maryland, an unrestricted state, there is only one OB practicing Baltimore. I don't give a shit what the costs are as a dollar figure, but if you are chasing people out of the profession, it's the wrong answer. Lawyers don't provide health care.

My suggestion is that we adopt the British model of torts. You can sue someone, but if you fail, you pay their costs and your costs. Therefore, you better be DAMNED sure you have a case before you file it.

 

[editec]

Next time you visit your doctor ask him or her what they pay in medical insurance, if they're willing.

My MD was paying $40,000 a year for her entire practice.

She was charging $150 per visit, FYI. That's $300 per hour, or $600,000 per year assuming a 2000 hour work year.

She wasn't exactly hurtin, ya know?

Most don't like to divulge it but if you know them well enough they might. It's a simple number that you don't need to look around the internet for.

Yeah, if it's a simple number, and its such a serious problem, why don't any of us KNOW what percentage of all HC dollars it costs?

Last I heard its less than 2% of all HC dollars. But that was a claim which I could not substantiate from any source I trusted.

Now figure out how many patients he needs to see to pay for that. Notice how large his staff is and figure a big portion of their costs into the equation because most of what they do is keep records that are CYA in large part, not just bookkeeping.

The admin staff is mostly necessary since they have to play the insurance game with multiple insurers.

If they send you off for tests, figure how many really aren't needed but instead, again, are just CYA.

Now that is a point I definitely understand. Again I cannot find figures that tell me how much such defensive medicine money is so wasted, but I certainly believe that this is a source of wasted HVC dollars.

I just wish we had some metrics to KNOW how much waste it is.

We're paying for a perceived risk that is very high and the more patients the doctor sees the more their risk goes up, while enforced pricing from HMO's, Medicare, and now a social medical system pushes prices down which means they have to see more patients pushing risk even further up meaning they have to see more patients, and so on and so on. As long as the risk is wide open there is no happy median. The only way to achieve one is to cap the risk.

Yeah, well every business pays for insurance to protect itself from lawsuit.

My question is, as yet unanswered. What percentage of HC dollars are spend on paying for medical malpracitce insurance?

It's just plain simple mathematics and has nothing to do with politics, but it has, of course, gotten politicized because it gets votes one way or the other.

Well it's not plain simple mathematics until we have the actual numbers, is it?

 

[cbi0090]

I just want to add something more. I had the above conversation with my dermotologist whom I've gotten to know quite well. Now I'm a structural engineer and I have to carry professional liability, E & O, ect. for my business and am very familiar with standards of practice that anyone doing engineering must follow to the letter or you just won't be able to get insurance. You wouldn't believe the calculations and quality controls that are necessary and must be documented for things that common sense would tell you works. What should be a a simple decision or selection instead becomes many manhours of effort.
When I asked the doctor about whether his field had similar restrictions and standards that he had to follow, he laughed and was almost relieved to talk to someone who "got it." I found out that what I thought was a burdensome CYA waste of money and effort in my field, turned out to be a joke compared to what he has to go through.
At least for me, I'm dealing with materials of known or documented assumed properties and natural functions that have been well established in science both theoretical and applied. My doctor, on the other hand, has none of these advantages. Everything they know is based on observation and trial and error, no one person walking in the door is the same, probability and educated guesses play and big part in diagnosis and medications. Medical practice is more an art than a science.
His insurance bill is more than I make in a year and that doesn't even include all the other costs I mentioned above which he guesses triples or quadruples the amount.
My parents used to take me and siblings to the doctor and pay for the cost out of their pockets or over a short period of time. That was just 50 years ago.

That is an outrageous statement and it is FALSE... a minimum of 8 years of intense science based schooling just to be a practitioner...no Art school I know...

Doctors spend 8 years of exposure to a lot of information that was learned basically through trial and error. There aren't many equations in medicine. A lot of practicle facts and much theory but very few absolutes. Engineers have the advantage of mathematics and physics that contain a lot of well understood principles. I can say F=ma. It's been around for hundreds of years and used to be considered a natural fact then, Einstein changed all that but no big deal. It's close enough, so close as to still be considered a fact. In medicine about the only thing you've got that comes close to that is "people die when they have no air". That's is unless they drown or are in very cold water that changes things and, of course, some people can go quite a while without air, more than others. It's not so easy to say "take this pill and your cured". It's more like "take this pill and 99.9% of people are cured". The others could possibly have adverse reactions, like death. They don't exactly know why the pill cures most and not others, either.
I visited a pharmecutical research plant in high school once. It was a huge building filled with, millions of petri dishes. Each dish had a certain mixture and each was unique from the others and when they tested them guess what they did? They watched to see which ones worked and which didn't! That was their research technique. Trial and error. They told us that was how all medicines are tested and discovered. Just keep trying till you find one that works.

From your own experience, you should be a BIG advocate of the President's investment in computerized medical records to reduce costs and improve quality. Then, to create a data base of best practices; to give doctors tools to make the best treatment decisions for their patients by providing objective information on the relative benefits of treatments.

Absolutely!!! It's a no brainer!

You mention the word "insurance", yet you call patients that have their lives ruined by medical errors or neglect "parasites" instead of insurance corporations that promote personnel that find a way to DENY coverage...do you THINK those same insurance corporations "might" be milking doctors too?

No, I'm referring to the ambulance chasers, not the people who have been harmed in some way. They started the fray and now it's nothing more than everyone for themselves and to such a degree that there is no honor on any side. As for medical errors what are those really? They are judgemental errors. The doctor guessed wrong, made a poor decision, or maybe didn't think it entirely through. Do you make mistakes? Neglect, that's an entirely different matter. Little excuse for that. But errors are going to happen because medicine is administered by people who have to make judgements, sometimes without complete training, time, under stress, and so on. Do people suffer as a consequence sometimes, yes. Does everyone suffer, no. Does society benefit that people take on these responsibilities, yes. There has to be a fair median, going for the juggler of any professional who ever makes a poor decision is not the answer.

Please provide a list of any structure you were involved in engineering...I will make avoiding them an "art form"...LOL

I'm not an artist and never said I was.

 

[Maple]

I recently had a conversation with an Ob doctor whose partner stopped delivering babies because she had to pay an ADDITIONAL $50,000 per year for medical malpractice insurance. She was also required to keep records of the babies she delivered for 23 years. She sat down with a pencil and paper and figured out it just was not worth it to deliver babies anymore. The cost of this medical malpractice insurance is passed on to us, the consumer in higher fees for service. WE PAY FOR THIS. Many are frivolous law suits that won't hold a glass of water and these doctors are sued for millions and they lose these cases, which in turn causes the cost of medical malpractice insurance to rise which in turn is again passed on TO US THE CONSUMER.

Most of your members of congress and the senate are attorneys, many of them including John Edwards were ambulance chasers, that's how they made their millions.

Obama is a Harvard graduate who has come out against tort reform, know why, he is an attorney and many of his buds make their money chasing ambulances and suing doctors and winning on frivolous lawsuits. Bush tried to get tort reform but then again when you elect lawyers to the congress and senate what do you expect.

Don't kid yourself, WE THE CONSUMER PAY FOR THESE FRIVOLOUS LAWSUITS AND WE LOSE AND LOSE BIG.

 

[Bfgrn]

I just want to add something more. I had the above conversation with my dermotologist whom I've gotten to know quite well. Now I'm a structural engineer and I have to carry professional liability, E & O, ect. for my business and am very familiar with standards of practice that anyone doing engineering must follow to the letter or you just won't be able to get insurance. You wouldn't believe the calculations and quality controls that are necessary and must be documented for things that common sense would tell you works. What should be a a simple decision or selection instead becomes many manhours of effort.
When I asked the doctor about whether his field had similar restrictions and standards that he had to follow, he laughed and was almost relieved to talk to someone who "got it." I found out that what I thought was a burdensome CYA waste of money and effort in my field, turned out to be a joke compared to what he has to go through.
At least for me, I'm dealing with materials of known or documented assumed properties and natural functions that have been well established in science both theoretical and applied. My doctor, on the other hand, has none of these advantages. Everything they know is based on observation and trial and error, no one person walking in the door is the same, probability and educated guesses play and big part in diagnosis and medications. Medical practice is more an art than a science.
His insurance bill is more than I make in a year and that doesn't even include all the other costs I mentioned above which he guesses triples or quadruples the amount.
My parents used to take me and siblings to the doctor and pay for the cost out of their pockets or over a short period of time. That was just 50 years ago.

That is an outrageous statement and it is FALSE... a minimum of 8 years of intense science based schooling just to be a practitioner...no Art school I know...

Doctors spend 8 years of exposure to a lot of information that was learned basically through trial and error. There aren't many equations in medicine. A lot of practicle facts and much theory but very few absolutes. Engineers have the advantage of mathematics and physics that contain a lot of well understood principles. I can say F=ma. It's been around for hundreds of years and used to be considered a natural fact then, Einstein changed all that but no big deal. It's close enough, so close as to still be considered a fact. In medicine about the only thing you've got that comes close to that is "people die when they have no air". That's is unless they drown or are in very cold water that changes things and, of course, some people can go quite a while without air, more than others. It's not so easy to say "take this pill and your cured". It's more like "take this pill and 99.9% of people are cured". The others could possibly have adverse reactions, like death. They don't exactly know why the pill cures most and not others, either.
I visited a pharmecutical research plant in high school once. It was a huge building filled with, millions of petri dishes. Each dish had a certain mixture and each was unique from the others and when they tested them guess what they did? They watched to see which ones worked and which didn't! That was their research technique. Trial and error. They told us that was how all medicines are tested and discovered. Just keep trying till you find one that works.

From your own experience, you should be a BIG advocate of the President's investment in computerized medical records to reduce costs and improve quality. Then, to create a data base of best practices; to give doctors tools to make the best treatment decisions for their patients by providing objective information on the relative benefits of treatments.

Absolutely!!! It's a no brainer!

You mention the word "insurance", yet you call patients that have their lives ruined by medical errors or neglect "parasites" instead of insurance corporations that promote personnel that find a way to DENY coverage...do you THINK those same insurance corporations "might" be milking doctors too?

No, I'm referring to the ambulance chasers, not the people who have been harmed in some way. They started the fray and now it's nothing more than everyone for themselves and to such a degree that there is no honor on any side. As for medical errors what are those really? They are judgemental errors. The doctor guessed wrong, made a poor decision, or maybe didn't think it entirely through. Do you make mistakes? Neglect, that's an entirely different matter. Little excuse for that. But errors are going to happen because medicine is administered by people who have to make judgements, sometimes without complete training, time, under stress, and so on. Do people suffer as a consequence sometimes, yes. Does everyone suffer, no. Does society benefit that people take on these responsibilities, yes. There has to be a fair median, going for the juggler of any professional who ever makes a poor decision is not the answer.

Please provide a list of any structure you were involved in engineering...I will make avoiding them an "art form"...LOL

I'm not an artist and never said I was.

WOW...ART huh...

So, You Want to Be a Doctor?

The Educational Process

Becoming a physician is not an easy task, though. The educational process begins with a rigorous pre-med baccalaureate program. Standard curricula include heavy coursework in chemistry, biology, biochemistry, physics, physiology, mathematics, and so on. Pre-med students need to excel in their academic training in order to be considered for admission at a leading medical school. Affiliated with the Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC) are 125 accredited U.S. medical schools and 16 accredited Canadian medical schools.

Medical school enrollment requires exceptional academic performance, high scores on the Medical College Admissions Test (MCAT), strong recommendations from college faculty and administrators, and completion of a lengthy written application, as well as on-site interviews whenever possible.

Medical education involves four years of intensive classroom and clinical study. Core courses cover topics such as: Gross Anatomy, Human Embryology, Behavioral Medicine, Medical Ethics, Pathology, and Pharmacology. Students in their third and fourth years of study undergo various clinical rotations: e.g., Medicine, Surgery, Pediatrics, Neurology, Ob/Gyn, Psychiatry, Radiology, Primary Care, and Oncology.

Medical school graduates receive either a Doctor of Medicine (M.D.) degree or a Doctor of Osteopathic Medicine (D.O.) degree. Some students graduate from a dual-study program with a combined M.D./PhD degree.

Upon completion of medical school, graduates take a one-year internship that provides them with more extensive hands-on clinical experience as a medical practitioner. Once they have finished their internship and receive state medical licensure, they can practice medicine. However, the vast majority continue their training by doing a Residency in some medical specialty-such as Anesthesiology, Family Medicine, Radiology, General Surgery, etc. Residency programs usually last three years; but some combined residency programs-such as Internal Medicine and Psychiatry-last four or five years.
http://www.imdiversity.com/villages/Channels/healthcare/bruce_doctor.asp

 

[sealybobo]

There isn't going to be any change in health care costs without tort reform, Period. It's going to take the acknowledgment that medical care is a vocation that is only as good as the people applying it and that people are not physically created equal. Any kind of medical care carries a degree of risk and the plaintiff side of the legal system has taken advantage of that to a point where the system is becoming paralyzed. The entire industry is a feeding ground for these parasites.
Of course, it's all done in the name of "for the people" and they are masters of telling you sob stories but the overall effect has done nothing but escalate normal health care costs to a point where few can afford it anymore. Health care is not the science everyone thinks it is. Nearly everything we know has been learned through trial and error and a lot of best guesses by experienced people who basically have to balance odds.

This only accounts for 1/2 of 1% of the total healthcare costs.

So the question is, why are you destracting us from the real issues with such a small thing? Are you an obstructionist or are you one of the suckers that con men fool?

 

[sealybobo]

We need lobbying reform. We need to get lobbyist as we know them out of Washington. The politicians should do only what their constituents tell them to do.

I don't think campaign finance reform alone will do it, because they'll just figure out a way to do it different but still the same.

Tort reform. Yea, that's the root of it all. LOL.

How much is your mom's life worth?

Do you suckers know the right wing Supreme Court is now going to vote against people and for corporations everytime they rule? John Roberts has so far voted 100% with corporations 100% of the time. Exxon Valdez settlement got lowered to a rediculous amount.

So the fact actually is that the victims got screwed in the settlement, but the attorneys always get paid. So do the judges. And then they get bribed by the corporations to side with them and against us.

Is that what you mean by Tort reform? Then I agree. Lets kick out the lifetime appointments and start from scratch. If not, then they own us. The vote means nothing because the Supreme Court is who really runs the show.

 

[Harry Dresden]

There isn't going to be any change in health care costs without tort reform, Period. It's going to take the acknowledgment that medical care is a vocation that is only as good as the people applying it and that people are not physically created equal. Any kind of medical care carries a degree of risk and the plaintiff side of the legal system has taken advantage of that to a point where the system is becoming paralyzed. The entire industry is a feeding ground for these parasites.
Of course, it's all done in the name of "for the people" and they are masters of telling you sob stories but the overall effect has done nothing but escalate normal health care costs to a point where few can afford it anymore. Health care is not the science everyone thinks it is. Nearly everything we know has been learned through trial and error and a lot of best guesses by experienced people who basically have to balance odds.

Except that the county with the most expensive healthcare costs in the nation have capped medical malpractice lawsuits.

Whoops. There goes that theory.

only 32 states have capps....Whoops...there goes another Nikism....

 

[Harry Dresden]

Medical malpractice lawsuits are capped at $200,000. in California. When a Cali doctor complains about malpractice insurance, they are full of shit. I wonder what other states have caps too.

its 250,000 Brownlou....and California has the strictest medical malpractice law in the country.....32 other states have capps....

 

[Harry Dresden]

We need lobbying reform. We need to get lobbyist as we know them out of Washington. The politicians should do only what their constituents tell them to do.

I don't think campaign finance reform alone will do it, because they'll just figure out a way to do it different but still the same.

Tort reform. Yea, that's the root of it all. LOL.

How much is your mom's life worth?

Do you suckers know the right wing Supreme Court is now going to vote against people and for corporations everytime they rule? John Roberts has so far voted 100% with corporations 100% of the time. Exxon Valdez settlement got lowered to a rediculous amount.

So the fact actually is that the victims got screwed in the settlement, but the attorneys always get paid. So do the judges. And then they get bribed by the corporations to side with them and against us.

Is that what you mean by Tort reform? Then I agree. Lets kick out the lifetime appointments and start from scratch. If not, then they own us. The vote means nothing because the Supreme Court is who really runs the show.

politics is fun....isn't it Bo?....i agree with ya about the lobbyist....get em out....and who you calling sucker?.....your the guy sucking the juice out of your bosses PC.....dickhead...