StickToPriest, I knew you'd show up on this thread sooner or later.
I know that your mother is a malpractice lawyer. I do not think that all malpractice lawyers are bad people, or that all malpractice suits are unfounded. I never claimed that. I have had a relative die due to errors on the part of a doctor, so I am by no means claiming that those in the medical profession are infallible. They're not. And some of them, like some trial lawyers, are in it for the money.
Most people selected for malpractice juries know very little about human medicine. Therefore, charm can get a trial lawyer a long way - at times further than facts can. I've spoken to lawyers about this that agree with me, and it's entirely possible that your mother would see where I'm coming from with that statement. When charisma has more power in the courtroom than fact, the people that suffer are the doctors that did nothing wrong, because facts alone are not enough to condemn them.
Many of the cases that Edwards has fought are ones that other lawyers would not take, because they were deemed unwinnable. He won several with cheap tricks, such as speaking on behalf of an unborn child as the article mentioned. He does anything he can to get the sympathy of the jury. That's the way a lot of successful lawyers handle things. And as I thought was very evident in last night's debate, Edwards often finds ways to talk about things that make him seem like a really good guy, but all he's doing is avoiding the facts. A personal story about a financially unstable childhood does get sympathy from the American public, but it does not make him a more viable candidate.
I agree that medical malpractice suits need reform.
I agree that insurance companies need to be fought.
As I said before, the doctor I'm related to serves on the Federation of State Medical Boards. Part of their job is to decide whether or not doctors who have been sued for malpractice should be fined, or have their licenses suspended or revoked. The medical boards do a damn good job of getting licenses out of the hands of people who should not be doctors. They are very hard on other doctors, because they don't want anything potentially harmful to happen to patients.
You stated that John Edwards is improving healthcare by "holding doctors accountable". How many doctors do you know on a friendly, personal basis? I've known many in my lifetime, and I guarantee you that about 90% of them put their patients first. (Most of the other 10% I've met, I don't know enough about to judge their practices. I've only met three doctors who I felt were in it for the wrong reasons). Not only do they hold each other accountable if things go wrong, they hold THEMSELVES accountable. They blame themselves, even in situations where they are not at fault. They would do anything in their power to not let bad things happen to their patients, because they genuinely care.
I spent the summer sorting medical records. I have seen files in which the doctors write things like, "going to a baptism tomorrow. Godmother to her sister's baby girl, Elise" and "taking night classes at community college. Up all night studying for physics exam." Doctors don't write that stuff down because it might alter the results of an x-ray. They write it down because they care about their patients and want to know them as people. If you have ever taken a psychology class, you might recall that dehumanizing people makes you care less about them. These doctors do the opposite. They care much more about their patients than you know.
Sometimes things happen in the operating room that aren't supposed to happen. Most of the time, it is because something was unpredictable happened, like the patient threw a clot. It is completely out of the doctors' hands, and yet the grieving feel the need to blame someone (also something you might remember from psychology).
The treatment of the young girl in your story is horrible and I whole-heartedly agree that things like that should be fought against. I think it was unfair of you to state that I would probably call it "frivilous", as the case I used as an example was obviously of an entirely different nature. Please do not attempt to feed me my opinions in the future. There are many cases of malpractice that are worth fighting.
But there is a line. All too often, doctors are blamed for tragic events that they are not responsible for. From the research I've done on this (I admit that my research is not as extensive as it could be, but I have looked into this on more than one occasion) I have found that the number of malpractice suits that are based on nothing is rising. Why should the doctors that are doing the right things for the right reasons be attacked because of a few bad apples in the field?
I still love you Priest, but I am not f***ing wrong.
I starred in a short film called
Magnetic Personality. Check it out!
Updated On: 10/6/04 at 07:31 PM
.gif?width=300)
