You stomp on your own point. What good is the opinion of an "independent" medical expert if his incentive is to avoid the #1 cause of malpractice suits (if his incentive is to avoid disparaging the work of another)?
Regarding administrators, malpractice insurance companies answering to, quite simply not true.
You have no proof, but your post suggests the opposite of this claim.
many will help ouit in this type of situation pro bono at university hospitals. MD's are salaried -take on difficult cases for second opinion, advice, etc.
You still cannot or will not address why you think that only mfreddy should not be represented by counsel. Out of all these people with staff attorneys or lawyers on retainer, only mfreddy is to be criticized for involving a lawyer.
Huh? you may need some rest. Who said the independent medical expert had an incentive to avoid anything? you made that one up. I've worked at a university hosp, btw, and never had any contact with a hosp admin or lawyer to muzzle me or any other MD (I dont tell you about real estate law). And number 3, I have told Mfreddy not to run to a lawyer without any proof of negligence, not to avoid lawyers altogether. If he has proof, go for it. but if it is a fishing expedition, he has stopped researching at that point and become an advocate of a position - negligence. And you know thats true.