[livius]

While I think she's looking for deep pockets, I have also read about similar things and I think she probably has a case. This drug actually does seem to stimulate compulsive behavior in some people, and it's not necessarily anything that they have had a problem with in the past and one could attribute to extreme but basically normal behavior. The brain is a truly strange thing, and drugs that tinker with it - for beneficial purposes on one level - should be watched very carefully for other effects.

[Dog Gone]

If the drug is beneficial to 99% of those who take it, and harmful to 1%, I don't think the 1% should sue for bad side effects.

It's like suing peanut farmers if you find you or your child are allergic to peanuts.

And even a 1% bad side effect would probably eliminate the drug from ever being marketed.

[RicocheT]

Just because a drug has a rare side effect does not mean she should win the legal lottery. She knew she had a gambling problem and could have checked herself into a psychiatric hospital for treatment. She didn't and wants a big pay off now. Anyone who gets on a jury for a cast like this should vote NO.