[salbam]

Lol. Unforuntately, to quote you directly "answers, which can only be gotten through a lawsuit" - it is you who is advocating that bad results mandate a lawsuit to get "answers". Lets jam the courts with lawsuits and watch the doctors scurry to the interstate to more friendly states (i.e. Indiana). You want the big $$$$. just be man enough to admit it. You don't want piddling $5000 verdicts - not worth your time. Bring on the big bucks sympathy cases - that is what you crave. I have enough relatives who are lawyers who tell me malpractice from horror stories of ethics gone wild. If you are proud of the John Edwards "Channelers" of the world, defend your profession. Can you honestly say that in court you are trying to present the MD fairly or are you trying to make him look like a heartless incompentent bastard?

[Iwo Jima]

....or are you trying to make him look like a heartless incompentent bastard?>br>

No, I don't. It's unnecessary and most often counterproductive.

One reason it's unnecessary is that the doctor quite often does that all by himself, as you have done on this thread.

And, no, I wouldn't be likely to bring a "piddling" $5,000 lawsuit. It's not worth my time. It's not worth my client's time. It's not worth the doctor's time. It's not worth the court's time. It's not worth the jurors' time.

It's not worth it for a lot of reasons to me. How odd that you think otherwise.