Originally posted by Sandman
Let's see...
1. The doctor makes a bad decision and permanently injures/disables a patient.
2. The patient hires an attorney.
3. The attorney presents the case.
4. The jury decides the doctor is at fault.
5. The doctor's insurance company pays the penalty.
6. The insurance company raises the doctor's insurance rates.
7. Rinse, lather, repeat.
Obviously, it's the lawyers that are to blame.
Sandman, my point is this:
Yes, doctors are and should be liable. However, more often than not, they are sued when they made no identifiable mistake.
For example, a certain percentage of all surgeries lead to complications due to infection. Even if the surgery was a total success and the sutures were executed flawlessly, infections sometimes take hold. You can blame the patient's immune system moreso than the MD.
However, this is a very common reason to sue, and to sue for a lot. It tarnishes the MD's rep and costs him big as his ins. rates rise.
We aren't talking about doctors leaving scalpels inside patient's abdominal cavities, we're talking side-effects that are nobody's fault.
It takes lawyers to turn these natural statistics into rediculous settlements, and the sad fact is that everyone, but the lawyer, ends up losing. He takes 20-40 percent of the settlement, and moves on. The client, generally ignorant to the methods and mechanisms, is just a vehicle for a transaction between the attorney and the insurance company.
Rinse, lather, repeat....
Just don't try and tell me that we're not a bit litigation-happy here in the US.
One of my dad's partner's once said to me: 'It's sometimes hard to imagine that many of the people that walk into this office see me as nothing but a walking, talking lottery ticket.'
