Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst
1
2
3
  1. #41
    I might has missed it in the article but did it say when the guy's last visit to the doc was? Imo that's kinda important because for all we know he could have developed thos problems and just not told the doc about it. Maybe if he did he would be switched to desk duty at work or something, its entirely plausible that a guy who has an apparent disregard for his doctor's advice to avoid seeing him.

    To me the only way they could have won that settlement would have been if they were able to prove intent because "high blood pressure, chest pains, shortness of breath and irregular heartbeat" are all things that would have been noticed by a stethoscope and a blood pressure monitor. What I'm saying is unless that doctor was a REALLY bad doctor there's no way it could have been accidental and if it wasn't accidental then it must have been intentially "missed", which means he should have been charged with something not just forced to pay some money.

  2. #42
    Well at least he died happy.....

  3. #43
    Quote Originally Posted by Kasierith View Post
    That may not be their primary source of income.. but there is a connection. Every person needs health insurance, so the risk is significantly higher than other insurance sources. You have more instances where you're required to pay money back to your customers, and as a result you need to have more money coming in or you won't even be able to come even. Surgeries and medications are extremely expensive in the US, last I saw, and the increasing number of pharmaceutical medications used means that what an insurance company pays out is higher. The high prices are a stabilizing factor more than profit base. I personally look at most of the blame being on the pharmaceutical manufacturers, who have the absolute highest profit growth in the health care system.


    Then perhaps my information is outdated.. coming from an outside source, there is a good chance that my knowledge no longer applies. But I am confused about what you're referring to... are you referring to comparing number of medical malpractice lawsuits over time to price of malpractice coverage over time? Please forgive me if I'm interpreting your statement wrong, I do sometimes get confused with English.. but wouldn't it make sense that there would be a correlation where the higher insurance is, the lower the incidence of being sued is? The insurance is meant to protect the doctors, after all.. so more money taken means more money used to protect doctors.



    The entire purpose of an insurance company is to spread risk... if Paul was healthy 5 months later but Peter had a prescription to be filled Paul would be one of those helping to pay for it. As for the verdict, the lower the court the verdict is in, the more subject it is to personal bias. The arbitrary decision where they decided the doctor had 60% of the blame for his death seems a little off in and of itself.
    What we're talking about is insurance companies taking money from their fees, turning around and using the money to speculate in the stock market. The Insurance company in that situation isn't spreading the risk between their customers, what they're doing foot the bill for their lousy investment on their customer. See the difference?

    Imagine for a moment that nothing bad to ANY of the insurance companies clients, and that they just collect fees and generate pure profit. The Insurance company turns around and invests that profit in the stock market, but that investment tanks. Now that the Insurance company has lost money, it will probably hike it's costumer's fees. How is that spread the risk from one client to another? That's shifting the risk of taking investments and footing the bill on your clients.

    Anyway, about Med Mal specifically:

    You expect some increase in fees simply based on inflation. However, the statutory structure that is now in place severely curtails the risk of a med call law suit. For example, say you have a 60k injury from a doctors clear negligence. An attorney (at least in Texas) is unlikely to take that because they can't make money. It will cost MORE money to file and carry the case to verdict than the damages generate. What that means is there are plenty of cases where the doctor actually legitimately injured their patient and they never get sued.

    So the risk of being sued has actually decreased. In other words, Med Mal Insurance providers are asking for more money to spread less risk. That doesn't protect doctors better, really.

  4. #44
    Quote Originally Posted by Kouki View Post
    This is not the doctors fault.

    A Dr can tell you, dont have a 3 way, but if you still do it its not his fault.

    Clearly this Dr did tell him he had a heart condition and not to engage in stressful activity.

    What is going on here is some cop family strong arming an innocent Dr.
    "Martinez’s widow claimed Gangasani did not properly diagnose Martinez’s high blood pressure, chest pains, shortness of breath and irregular heartbeat, and that he did not order Martinez to avoid strenuous physical activity until more tests could be done."

    The guy is a cop and the doctor knew there was a heart issue. He should have said to lay off physical activity until they were sure what was wrong.

  5. #45
    Deleted
    Quote Originally Posted by damntree View Post
    I'll have to remember this excuse if ever I run over someone. Hey no biggie guys I'm human and I make mistakes. My bad everyone. I'm going home now; have a nice life.
    At no point did I say that making a mistake as a doctor was "no biggie". The "mistake" of running someone over, unless it is an attempt to murder them, is usually referred to as an accident because it is not deliberate. There are very few doctors out there who deliberately misdiagnose and/or harm a patient the same as there are very few people who would deliberately run someone over. I also did not say that there ought not to be consequences for said mistake. Oh and fyi being human is a fact (unless you can prove that aliens live amongst us), not an excuse.
    Last edited by mmoc387c4faec3; 2012-06-14 at 08:57 AM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •