|
Users viewing this topic:
none
|
|
Login  | |
|
RE: GOP Plan - 11/6/2009 7:10:20 PM
|
|
|
rlj
Posts: 3866
Joined: 4/14/2005
Status: online
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Lapidoth
quote:
ORIGINAL: tacitus
Funny how every single country on the planet that has universal health care does it for around half or less than half the cost of the American system, per capita...
Looks like we need tort reform? huh.
But we continue having lawyers make the laws. otay.
Can you guarantee that the whopping 5% off the cost of health care that liability brings will be passed down to us?
Also if a doctor orders 1 more test for no other reason than "liability" reasons to make sure are you going to NOT want that test in the future? It seems that one of the praises for our system over the others is how thorough it is. Litigation can be a driving force in detection.
_____________________________
Thbbbt!!!!
A video of our cat and kitten:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ycCndVNctA
|
|
|
|
|
RE: GOP Plan - 11/6/2009 7:22:03 PM
|
|
|
iluvatar
Posts: 3037
Joined: 4/12/2005
Status: online
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: _jjp_
quote:
ORIGINAL: litfire2000Capping awards in lawsuits is, in my opinion, at best draconian. How much is a ruined life, lost income, a broken body or loss of a life worth? Most lawyers will not touch a medical lawsuit without a reasonable expectation of a favorable ruling. Arbitrary mediation and capping of lawsuits is a bad idea for the consuming public.
Capping awards would lower the cost of malpractice insurance and more importantly would greatly aid in eliminating defensive medicine thereby lowering medical costs. Currently doctors are prone to perform tests that are likely to be unnecessary just to cover themselves if something happens and they have to defend their decisions. This is something that is a common complaint from those receiving medical care, they wonder why the doctor wants test XYZ when it probably has nothing to do with their illness. The answer is the doctor is scared that if they don't do the test it will be used against them in court to win a case. This all adds up to alot of wasted money that insurance companies must recoup through increased premiums or refusing to pay for the tests.
As to your question what is a ruined life or broken body worth? Well that is a touchy subject and one I dont' believe can ever be effectively answered because it is based on feelings. The lost income question is much easier, there are limitations upon what most of us will ever make in our lives as income. A 45 year old car mechanic is not likely to be the CEO of a fortune 500 company anytime soon so within reason we can make an educated guess on what he will make in his lifetime.
If I give your wife a check for a million dollars, can I shoot you in the face?
Didn't think so.
How about instead of capping awards, we do a better job of defining what constitutes malpractice and negligence? That way, a doctor who did the best he could, but failed wouldn't be legally liable whereas a doctor who is incompetent, negligent, or operates on the wrong person pays through the nose.
-Dan.
_____________________________
Well, I've been to one world fair, a picnic, and a rodeo, and that's the stupidest thing I ever heard come over a set of earphones.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: GOP Plan - 11/6/2009 8:18:15 PM
|
|
|
litfire2000
Posts: 677
Joined: 7/6/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: _jjp_
quote:
ORIGINAL: litfire2000Capping awards in lawsuits is, in my opinion, at best draconian. How much is a ruined life, lost income, a broken body or loss of a life worth? Most lawyers will not touch a medical lawsuit without a reasonable expectation of a favorable ruling. Arbitrary mediation and capping of lawsuits is a bad idea for the consuming public.
Capping awards would lower the cost of malpractice insurance and more importantly would greatly aid in eliminating defensive medicine thereby lowering medical costs. Currently doctors are prone to perform tests that are likely to be unnecessary just to cover themselves if something happens and they have to defend their decisions. This is something that is a common complaint from those receiving medical care, they wonder why the doctor wants test XYZ when it probably has nothing to do with their illness. The answer is the doctor is scared that if they don't do the test it will be used against them in court to win a case. This all adds up to alot of wasted money that insurance companies must recoup through increased premiums or refusing to pay for the tests.
As to your question what is a ruined life or broken body worth? Well that is a touchy subject and one I dont' believe can ever be effectively answered because it is based on feelings. The lost income question is much easier, there are limitations upon what most of us will ever make in our lives as income. A 45 year old car mechanic is not likely to be the CEO of a fortune 500 company anytime soon so within reason we can make an educated guess on what he will make in his lifetime.
This is partly true. It is also partly true that many doctors work for a practice rather than practice on their own. A great many of these practices do lab tests and the doctors receive additional compensation for having ordered the tests. This isn't just about unnecessary testing, it is also about padding the patient's bill.
_____________________________
Ps. 122:6 Pray for the peace of Jerusalem
|
|
|
|
|
RE: GOP Plan - 11/6/2009 9:11:58 PM
|
|
|
SonInMe1
Posts: 1893
Joined: 4/16/2005
From: my mom by God
Status: offline
|
quote:
If health care were affordable,
Limited resources are never cheap.
Putting helath care under government decree will only limit its access more. Yeah, maybe it won't come out of your pocket, directly, but it will eventually come out of it through loss of jobs by increasing taxes, by increasing other costs and create the usual government waste.
You do know that the way the democrat plan funds health care is by cutting health care to the elderly?
_____________________________
You adulterous people, don't you know that friendship with the world is hatred toward God? Anyone who chooses to be a friend of the world becomes an enemy of God.
James 4:4
|
|
|
|
|
RE: GOP Plan - 11/7/2009 7:40:21 AM
|
|
|
_jjp_
Posts: 1854
Joined: 10/25/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: iluvatarIf I give your wife a check for a million dollars, can I shoot you in the face?
Didn't think so.
I generally expect much more intelligent responses from you
quote:
How about instead of capping awards, we do a better job of defining what constitutes malpractice and negligence? That way, a doctor who did the best he could, but failed wouldn't be legally liable whereas a doctor who is incompetent, negligent, or operates on the wrong person pays through the nose.
-Dan.
The problem is that juries no longer have a problem handing out millions of dollars because in their mind they are only taking money from an insurance company. This is a bad thing as that mindset doesn't lend itself to a jury that is terribly concerned with right or wrong and which acts on feelings.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: GOP Plan - 11/7/2009 8:03:04 AM
|
|
|
iluvatar
Posts: 3037
Joined: 4/12/2005
Status: online
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: _jjp_
quote:
ORIGINAL: iluvatarIf I give your wife a check for a million dollars, can I shoot you in the face?
Didn't think so.
I generally expect much more intelligent responses from you
Your response (to which I was responding), while technically true, seemed like a bit of a cop out. IIRC, you're a roughly middle-aged computer engineer and may only earn another million or two in your lifetime. Using that as the sole basis for determining an award is not good, because it essentially makes poor people worth less.
quote:
quote:
How about instead of capping awards, we do a better job of defining what constitutes malpractice and negligence? That way, a doctor who did the best he could, but failed wouldn't be legally liable whereas a doctor who is incompetent, negligent, or operates on the wrong person pays through the nose.
The problem is that juries no longer have a problem handing out millions of dollars because in their mind they are only taking money from an insurance company. This is a bad thing as that mindset doesn't lend itself to a jury that is terribly concerned with right or wrong and which acts on feelings.
AFAIK, in a court case, the issue of responsibility is handled separately from the issue of damages. If we straighten out the issue of liability, then it doesn't matter how big the damages are, because the doctor wouldn't be held responsible.
-Dan.
_____________________________
Well, I've been to one world fair, a picnic, and a rodeo, and that's the stupidest thing I ever heard come over a set of earphones.
|
|
|
|
 New Messages |
 No New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/ New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/o New Messages |
 Locked w/ New Messages |
 Locked w/o New Messages |
|
 Post New Thread
Reply to Message
Post New Poll
Submit Vote
Delete My Own Post
Delete My Own Thread
Rate Posts |
|
|
Forum Tools
Printable Version
