As pointed out that hasn't been the case. Also if you can't prove medical malpractice without having to bring in the physician’s statement you probably shouldn't be bringing the case.Sergei said:
Most Prestigious Occupations
- Thread starter stinkynuts
- Start date
But of course that would reach places where no investigation could ever reach.
Unless a hollow "I'm sorry" can be used as an avoidance of true responsibility in all court cases.
And they impeached Willy Clinton for a blow job!!!!!!!!!
Unless a hollow "I'm sorry" can be used as an avoidance of true responsibility in all court cases.
And they impeached Willy Clinton for a blow job!!!!!!!!!
What you said was
which means: I kill your baby. Then I say I'm sorry. Now you CAN"T sue me (as per the it's ok to be sorry laws you mention above). Admit your crime and rid yourself of all responsibility! That sounds great! Count me in.Aardvark154 said:On the U.S. side of the border one of the biggest changes in the past five years has been the enactment by a fair number of states of "its ok to be sorry" laws where a physician expressing remorse to the family for the patient's death and their role in it, can't be turned around and used against them in a medical malpractice lawsuit.
No, that wasn't what I wrote and it isn't the effect of these laws. Rather it is that you can't use the physician’s apology to the family in a lawsuit for medical malpractice. There is nothing which prevents the family from suing if there is a case for medical malpractice.Sergei said:which means: I kill your baby. Then I say I'm sorry. Now you CAN"T sue me (as per the it's ok to be sorry laws you mention above). Admit your crime and rid yourself of all responsibility! That sounds great! Count me in.
What I did write is that in states which have enacted such laws the number of medical malpractice suits have gone down, however, that is entirely due to families choosing not to file malpractice lawsuits.
Motto of the story: the only prestigious doctors are the guys in the emergency room who save you when you get into a car accident, the guys who sew your dick back on when your ex cuts it off, your fingers when you cut them off with a chainsaw, etc... Otherwise... Never mind... Crede Experto...
Prestige is being like the guy in American Beauty who had the guts to quit his "good" job to do something "dumb" but be happier...................
Prestige is being like the guy in American Beauty who had the guts to quit his "good" job to do something "dumb" but be happier...................
This is what you said:
Which brings me back to what I said before - maybe they're just trying to protect the establishment, either by taking advantage of peoples' FEELINGS or by paying them off out of court.
which means that their ADMISSION of guilt can't be used to prove their guilt!?!?!?!?!?!? The key words being AND THEIR ROLE IN IT. This is ridiculous. As far as the rest goes, I do think that DEATH is a pretty good reason to sue. Now, if some families don't sue and feel good about the "I'm sorry" then that's their decision. Then again they may have received out of court settlements (now THAT would be a rarity!!!!!!!).Aardvark154 said:On the U.S. side of the border one of the biggest changes in the past five years has been the enactment by a fair number of states of "its ok to be sorry" laws where a physician expressing remorse to the family for the patient's death AND THEIR ROLE IN IT, can't be turned around and used against them in a medical malpractice lawsuit.
Which brings me back to what I said before - maybe they're just trying to protect the establishment, either by taking advantage of peoples' FEELINGS or by paying them off out of court.
Take it up with your legislators. EOMSergei said:which means that their ADMISSION of guilt can't be used to prove their guilt!?!?!?!?!?!?
I guess nobody wants to address the real issue, which is that the American Medical Association prints an article in its' own magazine stating that doctors in the US kill AT LEAST 225,000 American civilians per year (admitting that this number is based only on death tolls in hospitals and is in reality much larger) while at the same time people are grumbling about the insurgents in some foreign country killing their soldiers (in much smaller numbers) who were sent there for dubious reasons. My only consolation is that I know a few Americans who are aware of this fact and are trying to do everything in their power to change this situation - because this is not just an American phenomenon, as Canadians often like to believe.
Who exactly are my legislators? I'm not American. You missed my point.Aardvark154 said:Take it up with your legislators. EOM
I don't think expression of remorse is necessarily the same as admitting guilt, especially in the sense of what would constitute malpractice. Anyways, all this law is setting out is that you can't build a case on 'well, s/he said sorry for it so they must have done something wrong.'Sergei said:which means that their ADMISSION of guilt can't be used to prove their guilt!?!?!?!?!?!? The key words being AND THEIR ROLE IN IT.
"And their role in it" = guilt. Unless the referred to laws have a different wording than that previously stated by Aardvark.
225,000 deaths - I would guess that a lot constitute malpractice, considering that the JAMA published an article saying that they were KILLED by doctors. The article is clear - they wouldn't have been dead if it weren't for the doctors. My point was that the establishment is defending itself in every possible way in one of the biggest scandals in history anywhere. More people in the West die from pharmaceuticals than from illegal substances. Oh well...................... I just hope SOMEONE looks into this...................
225,000 deaths - I would guess that a lot constitute malpractice, considering that the JAMA published an article saying that they were KILLED by doctors. The article is clear - they wouldn't have been dead if it weren't for the doctors. My point was that the establishment is defending itself in every possible way in one of the biggest scandals in history anywhere. More people in the West die from pharmaceuticals than from illegal substances. Oh well...................... I just hope SOMEONE looks into this...................
Your MLA, MPP, MNA or even your MPSergei said:Who exactly are my legislators? I'm not American. You missed my point.
Generally such laws even go so far as "I regret that the treatment didn't work, that we didn't . . ., that we did . . ." It should be obvious that if the medical malpractice was blatant - we gave Uncle Bill 2,000 times the recommend dose of Y, or we didn't bother to attempt a Caesarian section for an hour and twenty minutes after the fetus started showing signs of distress, you don't need any "physician confession" to prove medical malpractice.spatial_k said:I don't think expression of remorse is necessarily the same as admitting guilt, especially in the sense of what would constitute malpractice. Anyways, all this law is setting out is that you can't build a case on 'well, s/he said sorry for it so they must have done something wrong.'
What Sergei (curiously my former brother-in-laws Christian name), fails to accept is that the reason the number of lawsuits decreased is that most families merely wanted acknowledgment of error and if possible non-repetition, not punitive action.
Don't let our secret out!Strongbeau said:What petitelover actually meant was "Strongbeau and I were at Roommates during 'straight man' school." That's why we flunked out.
Missed my point. What I'm saying is that anything that allows them to keep on killing (as clerks for the pharmaceutical cartel) plays right into the hands of the establishment.Aardvark154 said:What Sergei (curiously my former brother-in-laws Christian name), fails to accept is that the reason the number of lawsuits decreased is that most families merely wanted acknowledgment of error and if possible non-repetition, not punitive action.
The medical industry is probably the filthiest racket ever. Pharmaceuticals and vaccines are dangerous and priced up to over 2000 times cost. They get lots of their research funding from the taxpayers (ie: us) and spend triple on "ask your doctor about......" advertising than on their research. They are owned by the same people who control the oil companies (no surprise there - pharmaceuticals are often made from petrochemical waste products). The AMA and FDA were founded by Rockefeller (the originator of the cartel who in the 1970's already controlled over 60 pharmaceuticals) and work for the companies and against the people. They attempt to eliminate all competition from natural products/therapies (to the point where they have burned labs, invaded vitamin companies and murdered researchers - how pathetic - is this what America has become? - what happened to life, LIBERTY and the pursuit of happiness?).
Anyways, I'm not going to say much more, except to give one example: Harper fleeces the Canadian taxpayers for $300,000,000 to buy a vaccine (HPV) which has never been proven and has already left at least 7 girls dead and over 500 permanently injured in the United States. Sounds like a mafia to me.
Anybody interested in this subject should try to get the book "The Drug Story" by Morris Bealle. This site gives an overview:
http://www4.dr-rath-foundation.org/open_letters/pharma_laws_history.html#rockefeller
Also, if you click on this
http://www.newstarget.com/
you can then click on the links on the left (diabetes is a very good one) to see just how many scandals these people are responsible for.
Now, if some people think an apology is good enough, then good for them. I still think they may be getting settlements - the US gov't has a special fund to make payments to people whose kids have been maimed by vaccines, for example.
