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 : High Tolerance Plasticity -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: ian124 who wrote (21910)	10/18/2004 8:35:54 PM
From: kodiak_bull	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 23153

Ian, Of course, real tort reform, real limitation of punitive damages, would kill the goose that lays the golden eggs. And not only in medical malpractice, but in all areas of trial law practice: product liability, class action, etc. So we can expect the plaintiff's bar to fight to their last breath to preserve it, and pay any amount to the Democratic party to keep their politicians on task. After all, we are talking about the trial lawyers' bank accounts, their livelihood, their homes, their Jags and Mercedes, their country club memberships. Kb

To: ian124 who wrote (21910)	10/19/2004 4:32:27 AM
From: cnyndwllr	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 23153

Ian, your post mirrors my experience in part. I don't see, however, how you get from "Oklahoma, due to the efforts of a strict medical licensing authority and juries with good sense, had largely been spared the onslaught of the malpractice mess until recently; now it is here in full force," to your implication that "tort reform" is the answer to the problems. What happened in Oklahoma to create the "malpractice mess?" Were there some catastrophic cases that were too great for the risk pool to handle? With responsible Oklahoma juries I would think that any large awards would have been justified by both the liability and the damage facts. Or was it some convergence of factors such as mismanagement through inadequate allocation of loss reserves that eventually caught up with the fund? Was too much of the fund used up in "management fees" or inefficient hiring and employment? Something happened and I don't believe that Oklahoma citizens became the overnight friends of plaintiffs and their attorneys. Clearly the malpractice crisis is "multifactorial" and one of the factors is based on the fact that the law requires that actual victims be compensated by those who negligently cause them harm. That's based on our long history of requiring that those who cause harm through negligence pay the cost of the harm. The fact is that real people sometimes suffer horrible damages from the practice of negligent medicine, and although it is a "cost of doing business" that certainly doesn't mean that we should make the victims pay the cost of malpractice by denying them fair damages for losses which they never would have suffered if they had received competent treatment. This is especially true since the "tort reform" states which place more and more of the damage burden on the victims seem to be having the same sharp rise in premiums, the same reduction in carriers and the same "malpractice crisis" that "tort reform" supposedly alleviates. I'm all for getting rid of frivolous lawsuits, I'm all for finding ways to reduce attorney's fees on both the plaintiff and the insurance defense side by regulation or by requiring arbitration or special panels that reduce the time and cost of claims, I'm all for assuring fairness in the proceedings, I'm all for a more stringent review proceeding to get rid of the small percentage of bad medical practicioners who cause much of the major negligence damage, I'm all for a comprehensive look into the (so far) private books of most insurance companies, I'm all for more vigorous investigation of oligopolistic practices that are, or were until recently, legal for most insurance companies in most states, and I'm all for insurance and tort reform. But I'm not blind to the fact that while the common whipping children of the insurance industry are the "trial lawyers, their greedy clients and irresponsible juries," those factors constitute the tip of the iceberg of an out of control industry that, unfortunately, may be the most powerful industry in this country.