On Fri, 13 Aug 2004 05:28:36 GMT, Gunner
wrote:

*snip*

How about medical suits that are mandated that the person bringing a
suit found to be spurious pays all costs and some damages, and the
attorney pays 5x the costs and damages?

Hum...well, I believe that is similar to the setup in England,
and THEIR system certainly does seem to cut down on frivolous
lawsuits.


Added to tax free medical savings accounts and a rating system to be
posted in each doctors waiting room that's based on how many times he
has been sued for malpractice and how many times he has lost those
suits. Same with hospitals etc.

In restaurants in LA, they post rating notices at the front door
based on sanitation, and cleanliness.

And of course we do the same with lawyers based on suits filed, lost,
won etc.

That does sound like a pretty good option. Kind of like the
energy ratings on refrigerators and such - just to let us know where
THIS particular unit lies on the range of doctors in his field.
I would hope that there would be a little common sense in
evaluating them too. After all, I suspect that a doctor that is in
a field where they are on the cutting edge of keeping folks alive
might be a BIT more at risk for a lawsuit when someone dies than
the average GP (assuming that such an animal still exists, of course
*smile*). Usually, when someone dies, the family has a lot of anger,
and grief. These days, that tends to be focused outwards and makes
the loss someone else's fault...which can lead to a lawsuit.
I suspect, too, that folks like cosmetic surgeons, who do
a lot of work that is "subjective" might well have a bunch of
suits against them because the results did not live up to the
expectations of the patient.

Its not a cure, but more than a band aid.

Yea...but, the power groups don't even want a bandaid.
After all, the AMA has had the INFORMATION needed to weed out
the incompetent doctors for decades (I can remember this being
debated in the 70s, if not earlier) yet, they have done nothing
about it.
Regards
Dave Mundt