- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Healthcare costs and tort reform - crushing your myths
Posted on 2/2/14 at 9:01 pm to lsusaintsfan4life
Posted on 2/2/14 at 9:01 pm to lsusaintsfan4life
quote:Wow. Please keep posting these gems. You are doing a great job of proving your ignorance on this subject.
It costs about 500 dollars to move to a review panel. Sorry you have no clue as to what you are talking about.
Posted on 2/3/14 at 12:51 am to Powerman
quote:
Do we need tort reform?
Do we need to abrogate the rights of the few to preserve the finances of the many?
There's no tort reform needed - unless its in the OTHER direction. Louisiana doctors are already magically exempt from having to pay any non-medical damages they cause over 500k - just becaude the legislature passed a law saying so. Of course -they have to cause these damages while practicing medicine, the field they are experts in - in order to be exempt. If they cause the damages doing something else that they aren't highly paid do to (like driving) - then we hold them to the full amount.
Tell me that isn't fricked up, huh? You frick up doing something you're NOT an expert at - you have to pay the full amount - you frick up in your chosen profession - and you get a discount! Good deal! Imagine if that applied to used car salesmen - or - attorneys?!?
This post was edited on 2/3/14 at 12:54 am
Posted on 2/3/14 at 12:56 am to lsusaintsfan4life
quote:
. What you failed to write is that nothing stops the accuser from moving foward with a formal lawsuit regardless of the panels recommendation.
Except the practical fact they will probably lose. If the review panel says no - in practical reality the suit is dead, you know that.
Why doesn't a panel of 3 used car salesmen get to make an expert, official recommendation on my suit against Bob's Used Cars before it proceeds?
Why is it a doctor can run over me with my car - and I can sue him without a review panel and recover more than 500k in non-medical damages - but he can frick up in the profession he claims to be competent in - and he get's special protections and even then doesn't have to pay me the entire non-medical damages if they exceed 500k?
Can you explain tha absurdity?
Shouldn't he be held MORE liable for messing up doing something he's trained to do as a profession?
This post was edited on 2/3/14 at 12:59 am
Posted on 2/3/14 at 1:01 am to NC_Tigah
quote:
Include penalties dissuading frivolous actions.
The victim of a frivolous action is already allowed to claim every penny in damages caused by such action - what more do you want? In fact - if you're the victim of a frivolous action, you can actually recover 100% of the damages caues. If you're the victim of medical malpractice, that's not the case.
This post was edited on 2/3/14 at 1:02 am
Posted on 2/3/14 at 4:29 am to Powerman
quote:Gaming? Really?
I had no idea he was gaming the system in real time. Now I'm certain that he was.
And you are "certain"?
So your doctor is a radiologist?
Posted on 2/3/14 at 4:35 am to offshoretrash
quote:
You can never compare the health care here in the US with foreign countries. We don't have to wait 6 months to a year just to get a minor surgery or have babies die because they did not want to perform a C-section and take the baby.
Neither does anyone in a developed western nation my friend....the infant mortality rate in the US is closer to third world nations than the rest of the developed world and life expectancy is also lower....
Posted on 2/3/14 at 4:37 am to SpidermanTUba
quote:I want plaintiffs to receive more than 45% of their settlement. NorthLAgoomba doesn't. How about you Spidy?
what more do you want?
Posted on 2/3/14 at 5:17 am to germandawg
quote:In the future, if you feel inclined to compare US Medicine with 3rd world medicine I'd suggest stepping away from your computer. You'd only need set foot in a 3rd world facility once to understand the full extent of the stupidity of your comparison.
Neither does anyone in a developed western nation my friend....the infant mortality rate in the US is closer to third world nations than the rest of the developed world
quote:
it's shaky ground to compare U.S. infant mortality with reports from other countries. The United States counts all births as live if they show any sign of life, regardless of prematurity or size. This includes what many other countries report as stillbirths. In Austria and Germany, fetal weight must be at least 500 grams (1 pound) to count as a live birth; in other parts of Europe, such as Switzerland, the fetus must be at least 30 centimeters (12 inches) long. In Belgium and France, births at less than 26 weeks of pregnancy are registered as lifeless. And some countries don't reliably register babies who die within the first 24 hours of birth. Thus, the United States is sure to report higher infant mortality rates. For this very reason, the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, which collects the European numbers, warns of head-to-head comparisons by country.
LINK
This post was edited on 2/3/14 at 5:21 am
Posted on 2/3/14 at 5:34 am to SpidermanTUba
Yes I can explain it.
If you want access to physicians then there had to be caps. If not these lotto lawsuits would create an environment in which medicine was cost prohibited. Would you rather A neuro surgeon be available when your little one hits his head or would you rather the doc in another state?
It's rather simple. Once again your posts are way off base. At least you are consistent.
If you want access to physicians then there had to be caps. If not these lotto lawsuits would create an environment in which medicine was cost prohibited. Would you rather A neuro surgeon be available when your little one hits his head or would you rather the doc in another state?
It's rather simple. Once again your posts are way off base. At least you are consistent.
Posted on 2/3/14 at 5:38 am to SpidermanTUba
As a physician there is no checks and balances regarding frivolous lawsuits. Anyone at anytime can accuse me of anything and there is nothing that I can do about it. Great system.
Regarding the review panels, if the case has merit it will win. The fact that most review panels side with the doctor should be telling. It tells that nothing done was against standard of care. Yes bad outcomes happen and are tragic but not necessarily the fault of anyone.
Regarding the review panels, if the case has merit it will win. The fact that most review panels side with the doctor should be telling. It tells that nothing done was against standard of care. Yes bad outcomes happen and are tragic but not necessarily the fault of anyone.
Posted on 2/3/14 at 7:47 am to Powerman
Tort reform is actually pretty impressive, I think.
Who would have thought in these modern times that you could convince people to vote away their own rights?
I do remember the campaigns in the mid 90's that claimed insurance premiums would go down if tort reform was enacted.
People actually believed them, and now look at how diminished their remedies are for doctor malpractice. Plus, premiums have consistently risen.
Who would have thought in these modern times that you could convince people to vote away their own rights?
I do remember the campaigns in the mid 90's that claimed insurance premiums would go down if tort reform was enacted.
People actually believed them, and now look at how diminished their remedies are for doctor malpractice. Plus, premiums have consistently risen.
Posted on 2/3/14 at 7:57 am to Have Gun
quote:
Who would have thought in these modern times that you could convince people to vote away their own rights?
Many societies have had solid caps on paying for the value of a life.
What is happening now is just rediculous. People are going to the physician knowing the risk and that nothing is perfect and will sue for MILLIONS if anything goes even slightly ary.
As a result, the amount of jackpot-seeking court cases have gone through the roof. Along with the increased cost.
I understand that people want blood for a mistake, but the malpractice bar is set too low imo. It allows for jackpot-seekers to play the game of silly lawsuits many times only for money.
Posted on 2/3/14 at 8:00 am to Have Gun
quote:Presumably you are referring to caps on awards, and not to tort reform.
Who would have thought in these modern times that you could convince people to vote away their own rights?
Posted on 2/3/14 at 8:10 am to MagicCityBlazer
quote:
People are going to the physician knowing the risk and that nothing is perfect and will sue for MILLIONS if anything goes even slightly ary.
Successfully?
No
Posted on 2/3/14 at 8:11 am to Powerman
I do love this thread. No one wants to acknowledge any of the numbers from the actual studies. But everyone is willing to give credence to numbers that people pull out of thin air that are an order of magnitude more than what the actual study says.
Brilliant.
Brilliant.
Posted on 2/3/14 at 8:14 am to NC_Tigah
quote:That is easily explained by the doctors in those two countries committing less malpractice qualitatively and quantitatively, he typed brazenly while seeking cover behind internet anonymity. Face it you and your peers in the United States are nothing but a bunch of butchers whom the rest of the world view as incompetent. You don't see the elites of the world seeking medical treatment in the United States. They all flock to the Netherlands and Norway.
Google the average medical lawsuit award per claim in those two countries. Then consider the frequency of litigation in those countries.
Posted on 2/3/14 at 8:14 am to Powerman
quote:Was this a shitty way to drag your dying Supernova like thread back to the top of the board?
I do love this thread. No one wants to acknowledge any of the numbers from the actual studies. But everyone is willing to give credence to numbers that people pull out of thin air that are an order of magnitude more than what the actual study says.
Posted on 2/3/14 at 8:16 am to Powerman
Once again you couldn't be more wrong. How does one justify Senator John Edwards successfully suing for millions upon millions on CP cases in which there is no evidence of doc neglect.
Posted on 2/3/14 at 8:17 am to Jbird
quote:
Was this a shitty way to drag your dying Supernova like thread back to the top of the board?
It's a way to point out that facts don't matter to people here
For all of the belly aching from conservatives about liberals not loving facts and arguing based on emotion this thread shows that partisan conservatives are equally as guilty.
This is embarrassing really
Posted on 2/3/14 at 8:21 am to Powerman
quote:I see
For all of the belly aching from conservatives about liberals not loving facts and arguing based on emotion this thread shows that partisan conservatives are equally as guilty.
quote:How will conservatives live with themselves after being so soundly Pummeled by Powerman, oh the fricking humanity of it all.
This is embarrassing really
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News