Comments (10) Jump to Comments Form

1. 

   nomad2112 said, 2 months ago

   One solution to the malpractice insurance issue may be for the AMA to insure ALL doctors. That may give them the incentive to pull the licenses of the few quacks who cost them the most.

2. 

   GNWachs said, 2 months ago

   How about our big brother, the source of all wealth, the holder of 9T in debt and paying all the other bills assuming that responsibility. And if we added loser pays it would become a profit line item.

3. 

   David said, 2 months ago

   Thus is the REAL problem with our healthcare system. The problem is that the Democrat Party is in the pockets of the Trial Lawyers of America…so snowball’s chance that will be taken care of.

4. 

   tpenna said, 2 months ago

   Not a bad idea, nomad2112.

   Not a very well thought out critique, David.

5. 

   furnituremaker said, 2 months ago

   sounds like a plan to me, Nomad…hey, why don’t we do like The Bard suggeted and hang all the lawyers…that would get rid of the silly lawsuits AND most of the politicians at the same time!!

6. 

   GNWachs said, 2 months ago

   A simple partial solution. Just like the rest of the free world. Loser pays. The trial lawyers hate this idea. Why? Because the act of filing a lawsuit is equivalent to blackmail. The defendant has to hire lawyers and it costs a fortune. They pay to settle (it is cheaper) and the lawyer wins. If loser pays they wouldn’t settle and would go to court. The vast majority of baseless nuisance suits would just disappear and the lawyers would lose. But Obama is in their pockets and that won’t occur.

7. 

   believecommonsense said, 2 months ago

   I like nomad’s concept, and physicians do need to find a way to weed out bad doctors, or find a way to stop surgeons who shouldn’t operate anymore

   I mentioned in a earlier post that a doctor screwed up what should have a minor surgery and I had to go to UCLA to have major surgery to fix it. I found out later that the doctor was being sued by other people for the same exact procedure. My guess is this guy shouldn’t be doing the surgery at all.

8. 

   GNWachs said, 2 months ago

   BCS

   If you read this please indicate so I won’t resend.

   Last week I discussed an Obama comment on insurance companies and patients dying because of their actions. I mentioned a patient and acne, which you refuted. I was in error. It was the other patient who Obama referenced . I read the rebuttal and confused the patients. See the attached. Obama did indeed overspeak, in error.

   http://online.wsj.com/article_email/SB125314896131518267-lMyQjAxMDI5NTEzNzExNDc4Wj.html

9. 

   believecommonsense said, 2 months ago

   I had already seen this earlier today on politifact. Obama was correct that the insurer delayed treatment, but it was reversed when the state Attorney General forced the insurer to provide treatment. politifact found Obama’s assertion false because there is no evidence that the delay caused his later death.

   The Wall St. Journal article you provided gave more info on how the presidents aides got this wrong, but wrong it was nontheless. There you go: Obama was wrong, though correct about the insurer’s recision of the man’s policy

   It is significant to note that in the woman’s case, her Congressman got the insurer to reverse the recision. In the man’s case, the state attorney general got the insurer to reverse the recision.

   If you looked at any of the links I provided on the hearing into recision policies, you would know that insurers’ initiate recision investigations into 1,500 to 2,000 medical conditions automatically, even though they acknowledge it can be tragic, but it is legal.

   I also posted a link to site which revealed Blue Cross gives employees high marks for performance evaluations based upon how much money they save from rescinding policies.

   To those of you who read this, that means it could happen to you or a member of your family.

10. 

    uuavey said, 2 months ago

    AMA doesn’t license doctors. Better solution would be to treat medical malpractice like workers comp which would take emotional juries out of the compensation setting formula and treat similar medical mishaps similarly. However, this would require amending the constitution as the right to a jury trial under the 7th amendment applies to medical malpractice claims.