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 : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: skinowski who wrote (250667)	5/19/2008 9:23:04 PM
From: DMaA	Respond to of 793914

I can't believe any insurance company would insure a practice like that. Probably practicing without any. Good luck trying to sue him.

To: skinowski who wrote (250667)	5/19/2008 9:52:23 PM
From: Brumar89	Respond to of 793914

That is entirely possible - w/b years down the line probably.

To: skinowski who wrote (250667)	5/20/2008 10:03:45 AM
From: Alan Smithee	Respond to of 793914

Yes. This sounds like post partum eugenics of sorts. Sooner or later one of the victims will change his his/her mind, and slap that doc with a solid lawsuit - which could not happen to a more deserving guy. The statute of limitations on such a suit would be suspended at least until the kid reached age 18. If you apply the rule used in some childhood sex abuse cases, with repressed memories, the suspension of the statute could be open even longer. That Doc, and any others like him, better buy a good malpractice tail if he retires.