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 : A US National Health Care System? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lazarus_Long who wrote (14)	1/9/2005 4:05:09 PM
From: Lady Lurksalot	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 42652

Laz, That's something worth looking into. Off the top of my head, I would think there would have to be clearcut negligence or willful disregard. I know that in this country most HMOs force potential plaintiffs into binding arbitration. However, the courts have ruled that some acts or omissions are so egregious and so out there that the HMOs do not skate on binding arbitration. One California case that comes to mind was a young man who was erroneously diagnosed with AIDS/HIV. The whole episode turned his comfortable life into a rapidly downward spiral. Also, he was treated with the extremely toxic drugs which were used in the late 1980s/early 1990s. The courts threw out the binding arbitration clause in his HMO contract and allowed the case to proceed through the regular courts. For what it was worth by that time, he prevailed with a handsome monetary settlement from the HMO. Sorry, I cannot cite the actual case. Then again, with government socialized medicine, there is that old saw that says you can't sue City Hall. - Holly