And the nominations for male ombudsmen are !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[samoth]

Re: And the nominations for male ombudsmen are !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Samoth/Stefka '08 proposes conditionally stricter penalties for tortfeasors.

Edit: As well as correct spelling of tortfeasor.

 

[chris302001]

Re: And the nominations for male ombudsmen are !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

No, I think most doctors are pretty much competent. I just think tort reform is tremendously unfair to the individuals who are severely harmed by malpractice.

How many come into the OR with half a chance to begin with? Looking around at all the fatties in todays western society, its a wonder that most make it through surgery at all.

I'm a fan of D's

1)Disclosure
2)Documentation
3)Smurfy's cha cha's

 

[Stefka]

Re: And the nominations for male ombudsmen are !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

How many come into the OR with half a chance to begin with? Looking around at all the fatties in todays western society, its a wonder that most make it through surgery at all.

I'm a fan of D's

1)Disclosure
2)Documentation
3)Smurfy's cha cha's

Sure, I'm a huge proponent of preventative care.
But we don't read about the 3 pack a day fatties in law school.
We read about the doctors who remove the wrong leg, or leave 3 feet of gauze in the patient's abdomen, or somehow cause brain damage and paralysis to a lady who went in for jaw surgery, or totally screws up infants during childbirth.
People shouldn't jump all over doctors for every little thing. There are inherent risks in medications/surgeries etc. To win a malpractice claim, the plaintiff has to prove that the doctor was negligent in that he deviated from standard medical practices. If it is a fatty who was going to die regardless of who practiced on him, then it shouldn't be an issue. But bad doctors (or maybe even good doctors who do a horrible stupid thing) should have to be held responsible for their actions. Lawyers are subject to malpractice suits too. Yay insurance!

 

[needtogetaas]

Re: And the nominations for male ombudsmen are !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

ok just so you know guys. I am deleting all this post whoring thread jacking shit in the morning.

 

[javaguru]

Re: And the nominations for male ombudsmen are !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Sure, I'm a huge proponent of preventative care.
But we don't read about the 3 pack a day fatties in law school.
We read about the doctors who remove the wrong leg, or leave 3 feet of gauze in the patient's abdomen, or somehow cause brain damage and paralysis to a lady who went in for jaw surgery, or totally screws up infants during childbirth.
People shouldn't jump all over doctors for every little thing. There are inherent risks in medications/surgeries etc. To win a malpractice claim, the plaintiff has to prove that the doctor was negligent in that he deviated from standard medical practices. If it is a fatty who was going to die regardless of who practiced on him, then it shouldn't be an issue. But bad doctors (or maybe even good doctors who do a horrible stupid thing) should have to be held responsible for their actions. Lawyers are subject to malpractice suits too. Yay insurance!

Your colleagues disagree...tort law needs to be reformed and that is coming from someone that booked torts. There is an informed assumption of risk from drugs to procedures...unless someone can prove negligence or recklessness..wtf?

 

[samoth]

Re: And the nominations for male ombudsmen are !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

ok just so you know guys. I am deleting all this post whoring thread jacking shit in the morning.

A thread digressing into legal/policy discussion instead of insults and flaming for once, and you want to delete it all?

There's an EF "election" around presidential election time. It's going to be a permeating theme.

 

[Stefka]

Re: And the nominations for male ombudsmen are !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Your colleagues disagree...tort law needs to be reformed and that is coming from someone that booked torts. There is an informed assumption of risk from drugs to procedures...unless someone can prove negligence or recklessness..wtf?

But that is my point - the limit on damages is unfair to the people who have proved negligence, and have suffered severe injuries. Fuck Posner and his ilk, I don't like the cap on damages.

 

[Lestat]

Re: And the nominations for male ombudsmen are !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

yeah< hi

 

[needtogetaas]

Re: And the nominations for male ombudsmen are !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

A thread digressing into legal/policy discussion instead of insults and flaming for once, and you want to delete it all?

There's an EF "election" around presidential election time. It's going to be a permeating theme.

The budman will be doing all his debating and sticking up for members on the mod board. Not the open board.

 

[samoth]

Re: And the nominations for male ombudsmen are !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The budman will be doing all his debating and sticking up for members on the mod board. Not the open board.

You missed my point.