Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Couple Receives over $21 Million Dollars for "Wrongful Birth" of Handicapped Son
LifeSiteNews.com ^ | July 24, 2007 | Elizabeth O'Brien

Posted on 07/25/2007 5:23:17 AM PDT by monomaniac

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-62 next last
To: Mamzelle
What do you do for a living?

No one is asking for anyone to function for a career without errors -- just to avoid negligence, that is, doing what a reasonably prudent doctor would do under the same or similar circumstances.

Your contempt for our constitutional right to trial by jury is offensive. What other rights are you in favor of gutting?
41 posted on 07/25/2007 9:21:42 AM PDT by Iwo Jima ("Close the border. Then we'll talk.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: doodad
O.K., no problem. I’ve never been sued either.
42 posted on 07/25/2007 9:25:30 AM PDT by Iwo Jima ("Close the border. Then we'll talk.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Iwo Jima
I'm in favor of gutting the right of a plaintiff to sue without fear of having to pay for a defendents expenses, should that defendent prevail. And if the plaintiff is a pauper, let his lawyer pay those expenses.
43 posted on 07/25/2007 9:26:19 AM PDT by Mamzelle (Down with Mel Martinez)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: swain_forkbeard

What does the Bible say about aborting children?


44 posted on 07/25/2007 9:27:14 AM PDT by thepresidentsbestfriend (FRED THOMPSON FOR PRESIDENT...Rudy is a POS)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Mamzelle
Well, no plaintiff has "no fear" of having to pay for a defendant's expenses. Texas, and I am sure in all states, has laws requiring plaintiffs to pay for frivolous lawsuits. There is unfortunately no effective way to recover for a frivolous defense.

I oppose "loser pays" because it effectively closes the legal system to all but the very rich or the very poor (judgment proof). Gutting the civil justice system will just lead to more violence when people who have no legal recourse take matters into their own hands and just start killing negligent doctors. The conservative Republican judge in my last trial emphasized this point to the jury panel, that thanks to jurors and jury trials, we do not see people just getting a gun and settling matters themselves. That seems to be a value of having trials that you have overlooked or just discounted.
45 posted on 07/25/2007 10:14:24 AM PDT by Iwo Jima ("Close the border. Then we'll talk.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: thepresidentsbestfriend

“What does the Bible say about aborting children?”

How is that relevant to this lawsuit? The couple did not abort any children. As far as I can tell without seeing the actual filing, the doctor is being sued for not correctly diagnosing the couple’s first born and for not providing accurate inforamtion to them so that they could make an informed decision concerning having more children.


46 posted on 07/25/2007 10:33:38 AM PDT by swain_forkbeard (Rationality may not be sufficient, but it is necessary.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Iwo Jima
I suppose a defendant wrongfully sued, who's been ruined and made miserable...you don't worry about him getting a gun and going after the plaintiff's atty? You discount that rather easily. You'd be surprised to know that it might cross the minds of those assaulted and abused by legal profession.

I guess that's the thing about suing the gainfully employed and productive members of a society, they obey the law ...and, that's where the money is.

Most people who are injured are already going without justice and recompense, and without any shooting, because they've been hurt by criminals and near criminals, the broke and the government. Oh, and plaintiffs and their attornies.

The kind of "help" you imagine you are giving is left for those who can go after the private businesses and the well-insured, and you know that no matter how bad a job you do, you won't have to make the defendant "whole" again.

47 posted on 07/25/2007 10:36:51 AM PDT by Mamzelle (Down with Mel Martinez)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: ontap

I can sue you for that remark!


48 posted on 07/25/2007 10:39:49 AM PDT by LIConFem (Thompson 2008. Lifetime ACU Rating: 86 -- Hunter 2008 (VP) Lifetime ACU Rating: 92)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: ClaireSolt

So, what you’re sayin’ is, he should have kept is genes in his jeans?


49 posted on 07/25/2007 10:43:01 AM PDT by LIConFem (Thompson 2008. Lifetime ACU Rating: 86 -- Hunter 2008 (VP) Lifetime ACU Rating: 92)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: LIConFem

I know!! But it really does get laughable what people can sue and win on.


50 posted on 07/25/2007 10:56:40 AM PDT by ontap (Just another backstabbing conservative)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: gracesdad

That doesn’t make it right or ethical.


51 posted on 07/25/2007 11:01:01 AM PDT by ontap (Just another backstabbing conservative)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: swain_forkbeard

No their holding the Dr. responsible for giving an opinion. What they’re really doing is trying to get some money because they had afflicted children.


52 posted on 07/25/2007 11:06:15 AM PDT by ontap (Just another backstabbing conservative)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: ontap

So we are in agreement!


53 posted on 07/25/2007 11:11:25 AM PDT by swain_forkbeard (Rationality may not be sufficient, but it is necessary.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: swain_forkbeard

No! I don’t think they have any cause for recovery, I think they’re just throwing the suit out there hoping that the insurance co. will give them a settlement.


54 posted on 07/25/2007 11:21:19 AM PDT by ontap (Just another backstabbing conservative)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: swain_forkbeard
What does the Bible say about aborting children?”

How is that relevant to this lawsuit? The couple did not abort any children.

The story said, if they had known they would have aborted the child.Does not that make it relevant??

So if abortion where a crime in the eyes of the law, as it is in the EYES OF GOD....there argument could not have been used in this case. Seems clear to me.

If Bork(sp) had made it on to the court, the case would be mute. You could not have argued that you would have murdered your child.

I rest my case.

55 posted on 07/25/2007 12:23:43 PM PDT by thepresidentsbestfriend (FRED THOMPSON FOR PRESIDENT...Rudy is a POS)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: monomaniac

IMO, this is the legacy of the drug culture.

Use all that crap- damage you own system and create monsters.
THEN you sue the doctor and the hospital.

Funny, the population didn’t have near this high a percentage of troubled kids before the drug culture of the 60’s.

Someday the researchers are going to prove my theory.


56 posted on 07/25/2007 12:29:25 PM PDT by ridesthemiles
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: thepresidentsbestfriend

“I rest my case.”

What case? There was no abortion. Your argument is about something that did not happen. The lawsuit is about something that did happen.


57 posted on 07/25/2007 12:44:56 PM PDT by swain_forkbeard (Rationality may not be sufficient, but it is necessary.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: Mamzelle
This would work. It's called "no fault" insurance. Not only would it provide for "adverse outcomes", directly to the patient without a lawyer taking his "third plus expenses" but it would add to the greater knowledge and improvement of medical care, since you wouldn't have medical professionals with a "fortress" mentality.

It's ridiculous to think that any human being can function throughout a whole career without errors. With a system like you suggest, they could "come in from the cold" and deal with problems.

Yes human beings are going to sadly make mistakes. Efforts can be made to minimize it, but jackpot lawsuits doesn't appear to help. Europe doesn't seem to have more accidents then America. And thats the word that should be used accidents.

Thanks for agreeing with my idea and thinking it could work. And thanks for the name of it which I hadn't put together 'no fault'. Thats what I'm going to call it from now on when explaining to people:). The greater knowledge and improvement of healthcare is the most important factor to me above all else. And I think you need an expert panel of highly educated medical degree holders to achieve that. And we don't have to reinvent the wheel, I'd just look at what say France did for that and set it up here.

58 posted on 07/25/2007 3:35:37 PM PDT by ran20
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: ran20
I know the inside workings of a few hospitals--and there's a lot more at stake than doctors, though it is doctors who get the focus. Everyone says "doctors' bills" when they really mean "hospital bills." Wouldn't I love to just pay a doctor's bill, rather than face financing a major hospital plant, which costs as much to get started as a Space Shuttle flight.

Every day, every administrator and technician and janitor of a hospital is thinking in terms of protecting themselves from lawyers. It's not just defensive medicine and ordering too many tests, every darn decision is made first "of the lawyers, by the lawyers, and for the lawyers." New policies, protocols, equipment, supplies...the "lawyer tax" on time and effort is gargantuan. Do we buy this new machine? The old one is still very good. But if we fail to buy the new and brighter version, will we be in "bad faith" and not in "standard of care" and will there be a paper trail that will make us look bad in court? Every memo must be parsed, because it's evidence...

The "no fault" idea has been batted around--I like it because it would bring technicians "in from the cold" and provide some safe harbor for improving patient care while addressing adverse outcomes.

59 posted on 07/25/2007 3:47:13 PM PDT by Mamzelle (Down with Mel Martinez)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: Iwo Jima
re: Lawyers get sued all the time for their negligent mistakes.)))

Far more often, they get sued for what they do intentionally rather than negligently. I'm curious...does lawyer liability insurance pay for intentional torts? Most liability insurance for everyone else specifically excludes intentional torts.

BTW, I'm reading in the recruitment literature that Texas is way up in getting doctors to come from other states to practice there, ever since the tort reform measure passed. You may not be aware that Texas has great and expensive (to Texas taxpayers) medical schools, but lots of the docs leave and have left the state because of the adverse legal climate. Now they are returning--and some of the very much needed specialty surgeons at that--

The promised "doctor glut" of the Hillary years never emerged. Hospitals are suffering a shortage of general and specialty surgeons, particularly trauma surgeons. Enormous cities are doing without high-level trauma care, particularly in Florida. Drive very carefully when you vacation in Orlando.

Looks like the "little guy" is going to enjoy increased availability of physicians and there will be downward pressure on physician services costs (a tiny part of medical costs, BTW) in the state of Texas.

60 posted on 07/25/2007 4:00:35 PM PDT by Mamzelle (Down with Mel Martinez)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-62 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson