Skip to comments.
Bush: $250,000 Cap Needed For Medical Malpractice Suits
CNSNEWS.com ^
| 1/16/03
| Christine Hall
Posted on 01/16/2003 12:30:10 PM PST by kattracks
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 161-179 next last
To: cksharks
The death penalty is a bit excessive, but I get your point. :o)
41
posted on
01/16/2003 2:03:20 PM PST
by
ohioWfan
(President Bush - PRAY for him.)
Comment #42 Removed by Moderator
To: Chancellor Palpatine
While that is sad, why should anyone get more than $250K in non-economic damages?
Economic damages are unlimited, aren't they? That means, if the child needs care for the rest of his life, it will be paid for, and probably psychological services and multiple other services for the parents. The $250K is in addition to that.
The surgeon, of course, should be charged with callous disregard for life and imprisoned. Why punish the rest of society for his negligence?
43
posted on
01/16/2003 2:04:00 PM PST
by
Inkie
To: Chancellor Palpatine
Well at least in this case an honorable attorney would take the case for free. Wouldn't he????
To: Inkie
re: That means, if the child needs care for the rest of his life, it will be paid for, and probably psychological services and multiple other services for the parents. )))
You're making assumptions. If there's no insurance, if the doctor either quits or goes uncovered, there'll be nothing. Insurance is a risk pool, and as fragile as any patient. Make it too expensive for the market to bear, and there won't be any help for injured patients.
The system needs to be operated with hospitals and doctors on board as well as lawyers. There has to be built into the system arbitration and some common sense, or there will be no system at all shortly.
45
posted on
01/16/2003 2:08:24 PM PST
by
Mamzelle
To: Shermy
And you really believe that crap you posted? While in the hospital awaiting a heart transplant the Drs kept doing tests that made no sense to me. So I asked what the hell is going on. They said they were required to do hundreds of tests by the hospital and their ins carriers to cover their ass from lawyers. These are not Rich drs by any standards. They work thousands of hrs and do not receive very much pay. If they would leave the Staff of the hospital and go into private practice they could become wealthy. But without their services I know of 534 paitients who would be dead. Me included. SCREW LAWYERS!
46
posted on
01/16/2003 2:11:06 PM PST
by
cksharks
To: Shermy
How much have your health insurance premiums gone up this year? And how many benefits have been cut from your health coverage? Take a look, you may be shocked. Of course if your employer pays your health ins. premium for you, you wouldn't know the difference, but if the employer is passing more of the cost on to you, this is the reason.
47
posted on
01/16/2003 2:12:16 PM PST
by
tinamina
To: kattracks
When my father was diagnosed with two brain tumors, the doctors wanted to perform a list of other tests, in part, to discover the primary source of the cancer (colon, liver, etc). My father also had several other serious health problems. However, the doctors came back and said that my father's insurance would not pay for any of the tests since my father was terminal and "was going to die soon anyway."
48
posted on
01/16/2003 2:21:32 PM PST
by
Fraulein
To: onetimeatbandcamp
what makes 250K "right on". The fact that Bush said it..or rather 'set' it.
And Bush saying it don't make it so...It'll be fun to watch how many Republicans will be against this one.
To: luckystarmom
I sincerely hope you are not posting a tragic bogus story to prove a point.
I have never heard of a doctor's office giving out sugar water. Pedialyte can be purchased in any grocery or drug store without a prescription. If a parent knows what pedialyte is I would assume that they would purchase it themselves if they were advised that none was available at the doctors office. If a doctors office was not correctly treating a vomiting child a trip to the emergency ward at a near by hospital would be the next course of action for most parents.
I'm sorry but you story does not ring true.
50
posted on
01/16/2003 2:26:58 PM PST
by
CaptainK
To: RJCogburn
There's one more thing he could do to make me completely happy (and I'm very happy with him now...). That is, of course, to remedy our porous borders and solve the ghastly illegal immigration problem. That does not mean amnesty either!
To: kattracks
Bush: $250,000 Cap Needed For Medical Malpractice Suits Yea, and while you're at it Mr. President how about $250,000 maximum compensation for insurance company CEO's...
What?...
You say it isn't the business of government to regulate CEO compensation...
But you just said...
To: Chancellor Palpatine
Is that justice? No it is not. The system is broke, but this is not the fix.
53
posted on
01/16/2003 2:30:13 PM PST
by
TankerKC
To: org.whodat
About the same day that the kids doctors, the hospital, and care providers do it for free.
Seems to me we all did fine when hospitals were non-profits, docs lived comfortably and had decent, smaller, personal practices, and Blue Cross operated as a nonprofit entity. Of course, who wants to remember before everybody was insured to the gills and every expense down to the sheets of toilet paper in the hospital room was billed? Where an uninsured man could pay for the entirety of most normal types of care, with a little sacrifice?
To: kattracks
My guess is that those who support this 250k limit have never had the misfortune of actually being involved in a lawsuit.
Hard costs and fees can easily exceed $250k in what might seem a simple case.
The justice system is already stacked against the small player.
Economic damages can be tough to "prove" in court, the other side will always argue against anything presented and the decision can just as easily go against you.
This is a total sellout to the Insurance and Medical industry, all of whom believe they are entitled.
To: Chancellor Palpatine
"...Is that justice?..." No.
56
posted on
01/16/2003 2:44:47 PM PST
by
DWSUWF
To: Chancellor Palpatine
Your child's doctor comes to the operating suite while under the influence of prescription narcotics. Through ineptitude and while buzzed, he permanently paralyzes your child.You find non-economic damages capped, and the ruination of lives, all so middle managers at the docs insurance company can get bigger annual bonuses and golf outings at nicer golf courses.
You obviously did not read carefully enough. The only thing capped would be for non-economic damages, i.e., "pain and suffering","loss of consotium", "mental anguish", etc. In the situation you describe, the doctor should and would be held liable for punitive damages, to punish the act of operating under the influence. You would also be able to recover acutal economic damages, including the cost of caring for that chold for the rest of his/her life.
To: kattracks
Keep it up Bush :)
58
posted on
01/16/2003 2:49:14 PM PST
by
Centurion2000
(Darth Crackerhead)
To: luckystarmom
If what you say is accurate, then under Bush's proposal, you would still be able to recover the acutal costs to care for your doctor. If there was gross negligence, bordering on criminal malfeasance, you might even get punitive damages, whhich would not be capped. The only thing capped would be for non-economic damages.
Just in case you think I don't know what you have gone through: My son suffered a minor stroke when he was six months old. That left him with seizures and some developmental delays but he seemed to be recovering well. When he was a year old, he had a fever and had a really hard seizure. We took him to the ER. While in the ER, he went into an uncontrollable series of seizures lasting 2 hours. They finally had to put him into a medically induced coma to stop the seizures, and life-flight him to the major children's hospital in Houston. There was severe brain damage, and he was left with cerebral palsy and severe mental retardation.
Could we have sued the hospital? Probably. It never even entered my mind. The hospital did everything they could, as far as I could tell. Just because there was a bad outcome did not make it their fault.
Was this your first child? Because the importance of replacing electrolytes in an infant is something I learned with my first child, from my pediatrician. I'm sorry for what happened to your daughter, but if lawyers won't take the case, it is probably because you don't have a case to make...
To: luckystarmom
First they need to hold doctors and nurses, legally responsible. If they are proven negligent, send them to jail. If it is a probable accident, then insurance should kick in to take care of the consequences. Whatever happened to less Fedgov? Now we will have more laws passed down from on high. The opposite of conservatives stated beliefs.
60
posted on
01/16/2003 3:00:16 PM PST
by
jeremiah
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 161-179 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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson