Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TimF who wrote (194292)	7/13/2004 10:37:19 PM
From: tejek	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1573433

It was MDs vs the lower classes. I don't think it is. It was about trial lawyers and lawsuits. In many cases medical malpractice suits hurts the lower class. You didn't go back far enough. The original argument was between Joe and John. Joe was saying that the jury system aka as the little guy was unfairly going after MDs and finding for the plaintiffs. I don't think they should be eliminated because some forms of sanction for negligent or unprofessional doctors is needed and some form of compensation is needed for at least severe cases of such unprofessional behavior by doctors but I think malpractice suits (and many other forms of liability lawsuits) should be reigned in. I think the system as it is currently set up does a lot of harm. Reform is needed. The only thing I believe needs to be done is to put a reasonable cap on the financial settlements. Beyond that, I think there is little wrong with the system. There are incompetent MDs just like in any other profession; and when they screw up they endanger someone's life. ted