[salbam]

Said no such thing. I just asked if you are suggesting that the malpractice lawyer is looking for facts or $$$. Honestly. If you trust the malpractice lawyers to over the doctors, just say it - if that is your position then justr defend it. Would you trust that group to determine facts in your business dealing with clients if they would get a HUGE payday by finding you at fault?

[Petronski]

Said no such thing.

It's the logic of your position. The doctor's attorneys are going to instruct him to volunteer nothing, and to consider the immense liability of a guilty verdict before saying anything at all.

You're viscerally unable to consider the possibility the doctor MIGHT be at fault, but if he is, freddy has NO hope of getting the truth without a lawyer of his own.

Your advice to him is the same as saying weapons are bad so we should unilaterally disarm. VERY bad advice.

[bd476]

You are neglecting to mention that doctors themselves employ attorneys who write up their family estates, incorporate doctors' medical practices, represent them in real estate transactions, represent doctors in IRS cases, family law cases, automobile accidents, bankruptcies, patent trademark cases, etc.

Should doctors be the only people whose motives are assumed to be good when employing the services of attorneys?