Personally, I think one reason lawsuit awards are so high is because healthcare is high.
Which came first the malpractice awards or the out of control pricing? IMO they are relatively the same.
As for lawsuits in general, if the surgeon does fuck up he should pay big bucks. If a surgeon goes in to remove an appendix and he ends up nicking a kidney and that kidney fuction is lost, then he should be sued for as much as possible. He quite possibly destroyed someone's life. Yes, a person has 2 kidneys, yes a person can live on one, BUT he added stress to the one that is surviving, and in 20 years it could go because of that stress ending a person's life much sooner than it should have been.
I truly believe there are far fewer malpractice lawsuits than we are led to believe and I believe insurance companies reem everyone. They collect on the malpractice lawsuits and they collect on the Dr.s paying the malpractice premiums. Insurance companies are in a win-win situation.
In fact from what I have heard most insurance companies limit a Dr.s liability if he is in their "system".
Insurance companies set the price of what they will pay a Dr. and so the Drs then have to charge non-insured outrageously high full prices.
You want to change the system change the insurance companies first not the lawsuits (although a limit on the award has many pros and cons).
Personally, I believe you regulate the insurance and the prices make them affordable (and if necessary state assisted), and the Dr.s accountable by having them go through a refresher course and evaluated every 4 years, or you socialize medicine and have the state take it over completely by taking out the insurance companies, restricting prices of meds, while helping fund R&D, and set everything on a sliding scale.
See, I don't believe the right's argument that if you give something free to people they will abuse it and it gives no incentive. That's BS and they contradict themselves because in the next breath they say it is in man's nature to better himself and become self reliant.
Yes, there are some that will take adavntage of the system, BUT you also free up billions upon billions of dollars from the people that can be invested in growing industries and jobs that pay well. Thus improving the economy and taxbase, so that eventually medical care provided by the state pays for itself in the extra taxbase.
In the end all this boils down to is the greedy insurance companies wanting no regulation and liability on the Dr.s (to some this is what the GOP represents) and the lawyers wanting no reform and the doctors and insurance companies being held responsible (to some this is what the Dems represent).
Two sides disagreeing and it's all about money not the people. Make medicine responsive to the people socialize it or regulate it and you end all this bickering.
__________________
I just love people who use the excuse "I use/do this because I LOVE the feeling/joy/happiness it brings me" and expect you to be ok with that as you watch them destroy their life blindly following. My response is, "I like to put forks in an eletrical socket, just LOVE that feeling, can't ever get enough of it, so will you let me put this copper fork in that electric socket?"
|