Posted on 08/26/2009 4:21:22 PM PDT by careyb
excuse or nonanswer
So.....if we were afraid of the Germans and Japanese, we shouldn’t have defended our country? This is what we are up against. Socialist, Communist ideals. Ain’t happening.
Tort reform? TORT REFORM? Slowly I turn. . . and step by step. . .inch by inch . . .
Tort reform is much ado about nothing.
http://insurance-reform.org/TrueRiskF.pdf.
Please just read the link before you all just start in. Page 29 says it all. LESS THAN 1% of total health care costs.
parsy, who is blue in the face
Exactly.
It's not all tort costs, just premiums and claims that are less than 1%, according to your (intentionally) deceptive link. I have had several very close personal connections with the medical community, and I can assure you of what liberal shills already know but try to hide: Those two items are a small portion of the total cost of the parasitic tort lawyers. The big cost is defensive medicine. We have unnecessary tests performed only so the doctor can prove he ran the test if he's sued. We have unneeded procedures performed for the same reason. There is a whole lot of waste generated by the fear of these lawsuits, and while the defensive medical costs are disproportionate, it's necessary because of the non-financial costs of losing a malpractice lawsuit. When the good guys lose, we have good doctors driven out of practice by bitterness or by fear. No thank you; I don't consider enriching a few predatory lawyers worth that high a cost.
1. I have seen enough of your posts to know that I will not convert you to a conservative position, one that I also consider to be the patriotic position.
2. I read enough of your link to know that it is designed to gloss over the enormous damage that tort lawyers do to high-quality physicians and thus to the decent productive people who depend on those doctors for medical care.
3. One of my best friends left ob/gyn after losing two "malpractice" lawsuits over "birth injuries" that were chromosomal conditions. I personally watched as he lost on a genetic condition where even the corrupt side's tort lawyer admitted there was no evidence of any errors or problems during that particular birth.
Tort lawyers who engage in that sort of legalized theft are evil. I am disgusted by those who knowingly defend such conduct and disappointed in those who support trial lawyers out of ignorance. Which category are you in?
Good and bad happen to everyone. For example, I have actually had to defend myself from a frivolous suit. So, yeah, it happens. But malpractice also happens. And most malpractice is never sued on or claimed on. Estimates are that the health care industry needlessly kills 100,000-200,000 Americans per year. Who knows how many maimed.
And your answer is to this is what? Let the dead and maimed just suck it up and go on so guilty doctors won’t have to take responsibility for their screw-ups. If there is any thing that needs to be reformed, it looks to me like you guys need to get together and work to try to reduce the amount of malpractice that is going on.
My step-dad was a doctor, as was one of my wives. So don’t try to put the innocent, blameless, doctor routine. Doctors are greedy too. When tort reform is enacted in a state, the alleged “defensive medicine” costs don’t seem to go down. I wonder why? Could it be that those needless tests are lining the pockets of other doctors, other health care entities, and the doctor doing the work.
Supposedly, the extra c-sections are all because of lawsuits. The amazing thing is that c-sections pay $5,000 more on medicare and even more than that on private insurance. And some doctors and some hospitals seem to do a whole lot more than other doctors and hospitals in the same area. Follow the money. Don’t try to tell me it don’t happen. I have sat at the dinner table and heard the tales.
Everybody likes to talk about greedy lawyers, but I have never seen any doctors out standing by the corner with a
“Will operate for food” sign. Most doctors seem to be doing quite well. As are the insurance company execs. As are the insurance company defense lawyers who bill by the hour and don’t have to put their own money into a suit, or wait 5 years to maybe get repaid, and paid.
And as far as “converting” me, brother I am the easiest person in the world to convert. I try to base my opinions on facts.
So, try this. Estimate the percentage of costs of defensive medicine. 5%. 10%. More. Less. Multiply that by the total costs on that exhibit you probably didn’t look at. Page 29. Multiply the “payout” by 40% to get the lawyer fee. Now compare the two numbers and tell me who makes a whole big bunch more.
Or, go back to that link, and read the “gawande” link. There, a doctor tells you in his own words why the costs don’t go down after “tort reform.”
It’s also in the main link, but you ought to read the whole story.
So, IMHO, I have nothing against doctors. But I am sick of the little pathetic prima donna routine you guys put on. And letting you rewrite the seventh amendment so you can save a few bucks on your malpractice insurance, while continuing to order needless tests and padding the bill is what is un-patriotic.
I will forward you a link on malpractice.
parsy, who says if you are truly mislead on this point, you have no excuse for not correcting that status, sooner rather than later
Our #1 goal should be to make Dean and all of Congress and the Presidency afraid of all of us. Apparently that seems to work.
I think this is a link on malpractice.
No one really has a good estimate on how much “defensive medicine” goes on. I am sure it happens. But the funny thing is, in states where “torts” have been “reformed”, the costs DON’T GO DOWN.
One of the Texas doctors, in the link I gave, tells us why. They order the tests for the money. Kinda makes sense when you think about it. Of course, a few rotten Texas doctors don’t make every doctor a cheat, but these “extra tests” they whine about-—geeesh, the money goes to them or their friends.
parsy the realist
The AIR report you linked to is pure propaganda! Have you looked at the list of AIR Coalition members?
Take a gander at this article in the WaPo...I want to make sure I'm giving you "spin you can believe in". Health Reform's Taboo Topic
We need to get the burden of defensive medicine off our shoulders and tort reform is the only real path to getting that done. It isn't the only thing that needs to be done to get health care costs under control but would be an effective and efficient step that wouldn't cost the taxpayers a dime, wouldn't restrict any particular freedom and wouldn't limit the individuals choice in health care proceedures.
Free Market solutions, Baby!! Put the People back in Charge!!!
Bet=best
Trial Lawyers bump for later..........
Yes, I have heard what a commie website it is, and how Michael Moore is behind it, and Nader, and even Stalin’s setp kid and one of Hitler’s nephews. Pol Pot’s third cousin twice removed is in there somewhere. You know what? It don’t matter. The numbers come A M Best, the guys who provide tons of services to insurance companies.
Here is what bothers me. How is the liberals are on the right side of this issue and conservatives(GOP) on the side of evil and badness?
I read your link. it is correct. No one knows how to measure defensive medical costs. But what one can measure is how much the costs DON’T go down in the states which pass tort reform. That is why you should go to that link I provided, and then to the New Yorker “gawande” story. Its about Texas, where they passed “tort reform” back in 2003. The overall health costs have soared. A real live doctor tells you why. ITS THE MONEY BABY!
Now, let me show you how the pro tort reform liars are pulling the wool over your eyes. This is from your link:
“What are they scared of? The answer is inescapable — such expert courts might succeed and undercut the special interest of an influential lobby, the trial lawyers. An expeditious and reliable new system would compensate patients more quickly and at a fraction of the overhead of the current medical justice system, which spends nearly 60 cents of every dollar on lawyers’ fees and administrative costs. “
And remember they liars told you atthe beginning of the article how “waste” was $700 billion to 1 trillion. And later, they tell you defensive medicine is $100-$200 billion, maybe.
What the liars at WaPo don’t tell you is the number at the link I gave. The number from the insurance companies themselves. About $4.5 billion payout to victims and lawyers. Out of the $11 billion in premiums to insurance companies. Why, oh why do they not give you these numbers? Why are they hiding them from you? It is because total payouts are less than 1% of total health care costs. Look again at the exhibit on page 29.
You see, they want you to think greedy lawyers are getting $500 billion a year or so. The difference between the $700 billion and the $100-$200 billion defensive medicine costs.
Quit being a sheep. Do the math. Take the number $700 billion, less the avg of the ESTIMATED defensive costs of $150 billion, and the $5 billion, lets call it, in payouts. What number do you get? I get a missing $545 billion. How about you? It higher if you use the trillion.
Look at the exhibit again? Total health care costs=about $2.4 trillion. They say there is $1 trillion waste. Sure ain’t the greedy lawyers. They probably got $2 billion of the $5 billion (40%) Where’s the other $545 billion to $845 billion waste coming from?
We won’t find out from WaPo. This article was about the lawyers, who you can clearly see didn’t get it.
Numbers from the insurance companies. Your article. You have been punked!
parsy, who wants to know how you feel about being lied to, and misled by these people
Question for ya, Parsy: If a cap were placed on the amount that could be assigned in any malpractice suit, a cap to lawyer fees and compensation to plaintiff, what effect do you think that would have on the insurance premiums collected/forced from doctors? ... And do you think that would have a significant lowering on healthcare costs in America?
You make a lot of good points. Here is one problem. Some states have had tort reform for more than 20 years. Plenty of time for doctors to change their ways. Health costs still don’t go down. Same basic rates of increase as non-tort reform states or more.
So the “let’s blame the lawyers for all this defensive medicine” just don’t fly. Maybe doctors are scared by all the phony scare tactics used by the lying insurance companies and the lying GOP.
Lts be honest here. After all the crap you have heard about “tort reform” and “greedy lawyers” and all the malpractice, have you ever ONE SINGLE SOLITARY TIME had anybody besides me give you a link where you could see the amount spent on the payouts to victims and their lawyers? And see it as a percent of overall health care costs?
One freeper was honest and told me he didn’t expect it to be that low. None of us did. Not even me. But why has that number been withheld by people who know better?
Like I told the previous person, YOU’VE BEEN PUNKED by the lying insurance company and the lying GOP.
I am assuming you have read the link. You can go to that “gawande” link inside the article and hear from a Texas doctor that the lawsuit stuff was bullsh*t. They do the tests to make extra money.
parsy, who hopes the truth is setting some of you all free
Go to this link:
http://insurance-reform.org/TrueRiskF.pdf.
Scroll down to page 29. These numbers are from A M Best, an insurance service company.
Payouts to victims and lawyers in 2008 were about $4.5 billion. Total health care costs were about $2.4 trillion. Do the math. Even the amount of premiums, $11 billion, is less than one percent.
So,if you eliminated insurance period, and or payouts period, you are still talking about less than one percent.
The effect of caps is SOMETIMES to lower malpractice premiums some. The savings don’t seem to get passed on.
So what is 1% overall, when your YEARLY rates of increase in costs is 3% or 5% or 8%.
So, there is no lowering. Please read the article and see what a non-issue this really is.
parsy, who is typing as fast as he can
Nice dodge, Parsy. That ‘answer’ avoids direct dealing with the two questions I asked of you. And when you add the insurance premiums into the laswuit costs, the amount involved in the legal ramificiations is a bit higher than your selected stats. I agree with you however, the numbers don’t come even close to adding up as presented and cited by the liars pushing the fascist takeover of nearly 20% of the GNP.
“Question for ya, Parsy: If a cap were placed on the amount that could be assigned in any malpractice suit, a cap to lawyer fees and compensation to plaintiff, what effect do you think that would have on the insurance premiums collected/forced from doctors? ... And do you think that would have a significant lowering on healthcare costs in America?”
1) Insurance premiums might go down some. In some states that have placed caps, the premiums did not come down. This is a hard question to answer because some portion of the malpractice premiums are unrelated to the payouts. That’s what that insurance cycle stuff is all about in the linked article.
2) No. It would not, and has not had any significant lowering impact on health care costs. It can’t because it is an insignificant part of the health care costs.
If you would like a much longer article on this, let me know. I have one on overall tort costs with malpractice as one part.
parsy, who is not trying to dodge anything
Oh, and btw, you don’t add the premiums to the payouts. The payouts come out of the premiums. That means $11 billion is the high side, which includes insurance company profit.
parsy, who is trying to be helpful
You might also find this info pertinent. From 2006:
Doctors’ Malpractice Insurance Rates Rise Even After “Tort Reform”
The following is a press release from the Illinois Trail Lawyers Association:
“Judy L. Cates, President of the Illinois Trial Lawyers Association, released the following statement today on the one-year anniversary of the enactment of Illinois’s medical malpractice law (PA 94-677).
“One year after the Illinois legislature passed a civil justice restriction that would limit the ability of victims to hold hospitals and health care workers accountable for negligence, the law has done nothing to decrease premiums for doctors and everything to increase the insurance industry’s already bloated bottom line.
“Limiting what an Illinois patient, injured through no fault of their own, can seek from a negligent health care worker or hospital is unfair - the arbitrary, one-size-fits-all approach ignores the degree of negligence or harm inflicted on the patient. Politicians should not be making decisions as to what an injury is worth.
“The civil justice system is many times the last resort for victims of medical negligence - with hundreds of thousands of people dying each year from medical errors, eliminating the right of victims to hold negligent health care workers and hospitals accountable leaves them with no avenue to seek justice and get the care they need and deserve.”
Below are the facts:
After this law went into effect last year, ISMIE - the state’s largest medical insurer - increased insurance rates for many doctors.[i]
These rates increased despite the fact that according to ISMIE’s own estimates, it will pay out 20% less from 2005 claims than 2004 claims[ii] and despite the fact that ISMIE’S net income more than doubled from 2004 to 2005, from $11.5 to $23.6 million.[iii]
In short, the law, which was supposed to help physicians, has benefited only the insurance companies. Since this law was passed, only two things have happened:
· ISMIE’s income and doctors insurance rates have increased.
· Illinois citizens have lost their right to full and fair compensation determined by a jury and their right to hold bad doctors and hospitals accountable even where there is gross medical negligence.
Caps Don’t Work
Nearly one year after PA 94-677 was signed to cap noneconomic damages in medical malpractice cases, injured patients in Illinois are learning what medical malpractice insurance companies and injured patients in California, Texas and several other states already know: Caps don’t work.
* Malpractice premiums in states with caps on noneconomic damages are 12.4 percent higher than in states without caps.[iv]
* In the five states that recently passed medical malpractice caps (Mississippi, Nevada, Ohio, Oklahoma and Texas), premiums rose at nearly double the rate as states that did not pass a damage cap.[v]
* In September 2003, Texas passed Proposition 12, which capped noneconomic damages at $250,000 in medical malpractice cases. The decision followed an intense campaign in which the Texas insurance commissioner, Jose Montemayor claimed that caps would cause insurers to reduce rates by 19 percent. However, just two months later in November 2003, major malpractice insurers requested rate hikes of 35 percent for doctors and 65 percent for hospitals, despite campaign promises that caps would lower rates.[vi]
* In a document filed by GE Medical Protective to the Texas Department of Insurance and obtained by the Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights, the company admits that “capping non-economic damages will show a loss savings of 1.0%.”[vii]
* In the 13 years after California passed the Medical Injury Compensation Reform Act (MICRA) that capped noneconomic damages at $250,000, physicians saw their malpractice premiums rise 450 percent. Rates did not stabilize until the 1988 passage of Proposition 103, an insurance reform initiative that lowered doctors’ premiums 20 percent in the first three years after its enactment.[viii]”
[i] ISMIE Mutual Insurance Co., Highlights: 2006-2007 Premium Rates, April 5, 2006 at http://www.ismie.com/news/2006_0405_rates.pdf.
[ii] ISMIE Mutual Insurance Company Annual Statement for 2005, filed with the Illinois Division of Insurance.
[iii] Steven R. Strahler, “Med-mal insurer sees claims fall,” Crain’s Chicago Business, March 20, 2006.
[iv] Medical Liability Monitor, October 2005.
[v] Medical Liability Monitor, October 2004.
[vi] “Mythbuster: Specific State Examples that ‘Caps’ Don’t Work!” Center for Justice & Democracy, June 13, 2005, viewed at http://www.centerjd.org/free/mythbusters-free/MB_CapsDontWork.htm on August 18, 2006.
[vii] GE Medical Protective filing with the Texas Department of Insurance, October 31, 2003, Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights, viewed at http://www.consumerwatchdog.org/malpractice/rp/2059.pdf on August 18, 2006.
[viii] Press Release, “Third Time’s a Charm: Another Malpractice Insurer Admits Damage Caps Won’t Lower Doctors’ Premiums,” Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights, February 15, 2005, viewed at http://www.consumerwatchdog.org/malpractice/pr/?postId=2045 on August 18, 2006.
Like I said, sometime the malpractice rates do not come down at all. I think they have in a few states.
That article has a chart which also shows the relation between premiums and payouts.
parsy, the non-dodger
Wow, I never thought the trial lawyers would turn out to be good for something. Nature’s mysteries!
"Malpractice" does happen, for the most part in the sense that just as I make trivial errors in my job on a daily basis (like the typos in this post that I hopefully caught and corrected), so do doctors. They are neither incompetent nor negligent when that happens (much less frequently for any doctor I have seen than for me, and I'm one of the best in the world at what I do), just human. As for the estimates of hundreds of thousands dead each year, I've read several studies with similar estimates, and they tend to be horsemanure. We have something like 4 million Americans who die each year. Does any sane person really believe that one out of twenty is killed by a doctor?
And your answer is to this is what? Let the dead and maimed just suck it up and go on so guilty doctors won’t have to take responsibility for their screw-ups. If there is any thing that needs to be reformed, it looks to me like you guys need to get together and work to try to reduce the amount of malpractice that is going on.
I worked for years with the medical community. In that time, I heard of only a handful of real cases of malpractice in the country (operating on the wrong person, wrong side, etc). In that time I personally observed multiple frivolous lawsuits, none of which had the slightest merit and none of which I would have been willing to file if I had been the "victim".
My step-dad was a doctor, as was one of my wives. So don’t try to put the innocent, blameless, doctor routine. Doctors are greedy too. When tort reform is enacted in a state, the alleged “defensive medicine” costs don’t seem to go down. I wonder why? Could it be that those needless tests are lining the pockets of other doctors, other health care entities, and the doctor doing the work.
I don't know what kind of doctors you're meeting, unless it's the ones obama talks about who pull out tonsils to line their pockets, but I've never met one of those. Not even one. You must live in a sad world. In contrast, I have yet to meet an ethical tort lawyer, one who cares whether his case has merit rather than whether his client looks sympathetic or whether he can find an "expert" anywhere in the world who will say what he wants said.
Supposedly, the extra c-sections are all because of lawsuits. The amazing thing is that c-sections pay $5,000 more on medicare and even more than that on private insurance. And some doctors and some hospitals seem to do a whole lot more than other doctors and hospitals in the same area. Follow the money. Don’t try to tell me it don’t happen. I have sat at the dinner table and heard the tales.
You really think there are more than a tiny number of ob/gyns who would do a c-section for the cash? That's absurd. I've never met one who liked that procedure for the profits, with quite a few who are irritated at women who request it for non-medical reasons. "Follow the money" is not a good strategy in the world of professionals who love their work - as you say most doctors are doing quite well financially. They make enough doing their jobs right, why would they cheat? As for "malpractice" lawsuits helping with that statistic, it's the reverse. I've never heard of a lawsuit over a c-section being unnecessary, while anyone honest knows there are many c-sections just to avoid lawsuits.
Everybody likes to talk about greedy lawyers, but I have never seen any doctors out standing by the corner with a “Will operate for food” sign. Most doctors seem to be doing quite well. As are the insurance company execs. As are the insurance company defense lawyers who bill by the hour and don’t have to put their own money into a suit, or wait 5 years to maybe get repaid, and paid.
I don't mind doctors and insurance execs doing well - they produce value in return for that money. At least 99% of tort lawyers are parasites who produce nothing of value, and I don't see any good in society when our tort system subsidizes them at the expense of those of us who want good medical care.
And as far as “converting” me, brother I am the easiest person in the world to convert. I try to base my opinions on facts.
The rest of us prefer real world facts over the invented ones that those who love tort lawyers invent.
So, try this. Estimate the percentage of costs of defensive medicine. 5%. 10%. More. Less. Multiply that by the total costs on that exhibit you probably didn’t look at. Page 29. Multiply the “payout” by 40% to get the lawyer fee. Now compare the two numbers and tell me who makes a whole big bunch more.
Doctors make salaries comparable to the tort lawyers, but the doctors produce value for society. I think that's relevant.
So, IMHO, I have nothing against doctors. But I am sick of the little pathetic prima donna routine you guys put on. And letting you rewrite the seventh amendment so you can save a few bucks on your malpractice insurance, while continuing to order needless tests and padding the bill is what is un-patriotic.
The pathetic prima donnas are the lawyers. I was on a city bus in an accident, and there were four people aboard (including the driver). I was uninjured and don't believe anyone healthy could have been hurt. I testified repeatedly both regarding the number on the bus and the severity of the impact in court as the more than 30 "victims" who claimed to have been on the bus claimed injuries ... and the tort lawyers still won. Disgusting. Malpractice lawsuits have no more connection to the truth than those lawsuits or the slip-fall claims.
First, I asked a question:
“Lts be honest here. After all the crap you have heard about “tort reform” and “greedy lawyers” and all the malpractice, have you ever ONE SINGLE SOLITARY TIME had anybody besides me give you a link where you could see the amount spent on the payouts to victims and their lawyers? And see it as a percent of overall health care costs?”
Let me add to that. Have you ever read it in any article about tort reform. Or seen it in a commercial about tort reform? Or heard it from any of the GOP shill pundits on TV you rant about tort reform? (egs. Sean Hannity)
So please, answer that question for me, and if the answer is that you have never seen or heard the number, which is $4.5 billion, less than ONE HALF OF ONE PERCENT, please hazard your opinion of why it is you have never been provided that number by any of the pro-tort reform folks.
Now, as to defensive medicine, yes, I agree it happens. Its hard to get numbers on how much but take the high side, 10%.
Do the math. Doctors spend $240 billion out of fear of the $4.5 billion “epidemic” of tort payouts? Doctors spend 50 to 60 times the amount of a thing to protect themselves from the thing? I think some of that is doctors making extra money, a doctor in the link admits it, but let’s assume you are right, and that it is all out of sincere fear.
That gives us a new headline. Lying insurance companies and the lying GOP run up $240 billion in health care costs when their lies cause widespread panic among doctors.
And this, when malpractice itself is in the “stratosphere.”
parsy, who still thinks somebody has been “punked”
My step dad practiced over 50 years, some at a very well known, prestigious clinic. He was old school. He predicted back in the 80’s that greedy doctors would “break” medicare. He was right. He used to fuss about the “blood gas” tests getting run by all the doctors in the ER.
Several of his acquaintances, ran clinics where they would run thru hordes of little poor kids to get their tonsils out, or old poor men to get TURs.
He did not run a bunch of tests, only got sued once, and won that one.
parsifal’s mommy, was a nurse for years and years. She has had two botched surgeries. Both happened by doctors scheduling up to twelve surgeries per day. On the first one, she kept calling the doctor to see what could have gone wrong, because she knew something was wrong. The doctor did not know, denied anything was wrong, and kept brushing her off. The problem got a great deal worse. Finally she went to another doctor who was able to ameliorate the problem. When we met with the risk management person, he happened to mentioned that he had popped the symptoms into his computer and what had happened was blah blah blah.
I leapt. Why I asked then, if he a risk manager, who had never been to medical school could figure out what was wrong within a few minutes, could not the specialist who had done the surgery have done the same thing and kept the problem from getting worse? Was it because he was so busy doing 12 surgeries per day. (And not properly sterilizing his equipment because he was not leaving sufficient time between the surgeries.) Not having a good answer, it then became settlement time. I still remember the look on the risk managers face—all proud of himself for discovering the answer—and then turning to complete bumbling stupidity when he could not think of a good answer to the question.
parsifal’s mommy had back surgery recently. The first one, done by a friend, was botched. Again, the surgeon scheduled up to 12 surgeries per day. The surgeon who fixed it, told her on the QT that the first surgery had been botched and how. She didn’t make a claim. She could have, but lo and behold, the medical records had been either altered or phonied up. All sorts of post-op notes were in there allegedly doing all kinds of care, that hadn’t actually been done.
parsifal’s mommy, a feisty old woman, got p*ssed off when she found out she could not get two lipid tests in one year on medicare. Meanwhile, up the road, a doctor is running a “medicare penile implant” mill for old codgers. The doctor is running them thru left and right on medicare’s dime. She thought this somewhat unfair, wrote her congressmen and a well known conservative pundit. Nothing came of it.
My stepdad was right. Doctors are breaking medicare. Do the math. $240 billion maybe for doctors in defensive medicine costs, that do not seem to go down in “tort reformed” states, versus maybe $2 billion for greedy lawyers (40% of $4.5 billion).
An as far as the bus accident. This is a favorite insurance company tactic. Gee, the impact was so slight it couldn’t have hurt anybody. I have been rear-ended a few times, and outside of a sore back for a few days, no real harm. Other people are not so lucky. I have one client who was in a minor fender bender and she has gone from active senior citizen to housebound on a walker. Medical bills in excess of $100,000. Very nice Christian lady. Not a faker. Offer from the insurance company-—less than $2,000.
And for what it is worth, I am not a liar. I do not chase ambulances. I do not advertise. I do not take any case I do not believe in. I have chased two social security cases from my office. They were just lazy and wanted a free ride on government money. I turned down a fee up front case just last night because in my words to the person, I do not represent liars and will not put one on the stand. I could have used the money.
parsy, who hopes this has enlightened you
Typo, should have read, “who rant” not “you rant.” You have been most polite and civil. You may bring a suit against my typing.
parsy, who screwed up
No. The lawyers do not get paid either way. That’s one of the problems. Defense attorneys get paid by the hour on an ongoing basis. The more work they do, the more money they make. the longer they can drag out a case, the more money they make. Meanwhile, the longer an insurance company can hang on to the money, the more money they make on investments. On larger cases, the spread covers the insurance costs with earnings to spare.
On my reply to another freeper, right after you, I put in some of my personal experiences. You might enjoy.
parsy, who still asks why do you think you have never heard the numbers from the pro-tort reform side?
I do counselor. I live it every night. Conservatively half of all medical imaging is ordered to cover one's ass from being sued.
I had a phone call. Let me finish my answer. I do not doubt that defensive medicine goes on. There are no reliable studies that I am aware of, and if you, or anybody else, finds one, PLEASE let me know.
There is an inherent problem in determining the costs of defensive medicine. Sometimes, the tests pay off. So, there might be some benefit. Next, how do you separate what is defensive, from what is money making. In my experience, doctors are human beings, despite what they sometimes think, and they are just as greedy as the next person. Why do so many people choose medicine as a career? Sure you have your kind, nurturing people. But you also attract folks who want to make a sh*tpile of money. That’s just reality.
So when a doctor orders unnecessary work ups, there has to be some questions. And with some doctors being partners in clinics and labs, there is more of a question.
I was not seeking personal validation by my question about the numbers. I was trying to get you and others to question why we never hear the “number” that everybody is so concerned about. Or, if the problem is “defensive” medicine, why the two numbers are given so that doctors and others may know the true “lack of extent” of frivolous suits. My take is that the pro-tort reform people are intentionally lying to the public for their own reasons. Hence my, “You’ve been punked” comments.
Now, the “ads”. I do not like them either. But what happens is those ads are funnels to the good cases. Out of every hundred or so that come in, my GUESS is that 1 or 2 or less go any further. I will try to find numbers.
parsy, who has got to run in a few minutes
Read my number 29 reply. Now that you mention it, my stepdad used to b*tch about all the CT scans, too.
But, as a doctor, are you aware of how comparatively little is paid out for malpractice? Did you read any of the links I provided? Are you aware of the standards of care in your jurisdiction? If you and others are doing unnecessary tests out of fear, then you guys are the ones screwing up.
Check with your risk manager, maybe an attorney. If you are getting sued in your jurisdiction, then by all means CYA! But there might be some ways around it besides keeping the legitimate victims from recovering in court.
parsy, who hopes you are learning something from this information
Thanks for the article. Here is direct YouTube link
Howard Dean Admits the Democrats Oppose Tort Reform out of their Fear of Trial Lawyers
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HaMj-WUC-aE
Dean starts at 1 35’ in
parsy, feathering his nest with the status quo.
I am not. I am simply doing a “consult” and making a “referral” to a specialist. AND, I ain’t charging anything.
parsy, the altruistic
parsy, the obfuscator
You gotta admit, though, that was clever.
parsy, the clever obfuscator
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.