IT'S TIME FOR UNIVERSAL HEALTH CARE

Probably a good possibility in Japan where longivity is one of the highest.

Perhaps true as well. However, the life expectency of a healthy, non-disabled person born at the same time is a good deal less than 90 years.

These are calculations a lawyer, who is attempting to maximize the unjustifiable return to his plaintif client (and the share of them he will collect) might make. However they are laughably indefensible from a rational economic or demographic viewpoint. Sadly however, this kind of foolishness does indeed sometimes prevail among juries and even judges in our very litigious system.

Now tell where did you find that a baby born severely disabled has a life expectancy of 90-95 years?

Perhaps true, but the Present value of that $10 million cost over the stipulated 90 year period is about 3 - 4 million.

Perhaps true as well. However, the life expectency of a healthy, non-disabled person born at the same time is a good deal less than 90 years.

These are calculations a lawyer, who is attempting to maximize the unjustifiable return to his plaintif client (and the share of them he will collect) might make. However they are laughably indefensible from a rational economic or demographic viewpoint. Sadly however, this kind of foolishness does indeed sometimes prevail among juries and even judges in our very litigious system.

From NCBI:

The effect of obesity on disability vs mortality in older Americans.
Al Snih S, Ottenbacher KJ, Markides KS, Kuo YF, Eschbach K, Goodwin JS.

Sealy Center on Aging, Division of Rehabilitation Sciences, School of Allied Health Sciences, University of Texas Medical Branch, Galveston, USA. [email protected]

BACKGROUND: The association between obesity and mortality is reduced or eliminated in older subjects. In addition to mortality, disability is an important health outcome. The objectives of this study were to examine the association between body mass index (BMI), calculated as weight in kilograms divided by height in meters squared, and subsequent disability and mortality among older Americans, as well as to estimate the effect of BMI on life expectancy and disability-free life expectancy among older Americans. METHODS: We studied 8359 non-Hispanic white Americans, 1931 African Americans, and 2435 Mexican Americans 65 years or older who were not disabled at baseline from 5 sites of the Established Populations for Epidemiologic Studies of the Elderly. Measures included BMI, medical conditions, activities of daily living, and demographic information. Cox proportional hazards regression analysis was used to estimate the hazard ratios (HRs) for subsequent disability and mortality during 7 years of follow-up. Total life expectancy and disability-free life expectancy were estimated using the interpolation of Markov chain approach. RESULTS: The lowest HR (1.02; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.94-1.10) for disability was at a BMI of 25 to less than 30. Subjects with BMIs of lower than 18.5 or 30 or higher at baseline were significantly more likely to experience disability during the follow-up period. In contrast, the lowest HRs for mortality were seen among subjects with BMIs of 25 to less than 30 (HR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.72-0.85) and 30 to less than 35 (HR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.72-0.90), with subjects with BMIs of lower than 25 or 35 or higher experiencing higher hazards for mortality. Disability-free life expectancy is greatest among subjects with a BMI of 25 to less than 30. CONCLUSION: Assessments of the effect of obesity on the health of older Americans should account for mortality and incidence of disability.

PMID: 17452539 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

USAFHokie80 wrote:

Miller wrote:

USAFHokie80 wrote:

Cycloptichorn wrote:

My statement was factually correct. Very rarely do cases without any merits whatsoever end up in the large payouts which are typically blamed by the insurance industry for rising costs (without factual basis themselves). It would be preposterous to believe that cases with no merit regularly end up in large payouts or settlements; in the absence of specific data, it can be safely assumed that our system of justice actually does its' job.

Quote:

For example, a large fraction of employee claims for discrimination are without objective merit, even though they provide a legal basis for findings of fault on something as unknowable as the subjective intent of people who make necessary decisions and choices.

How large a fraction? It would seem that we all do some of the things we criticize others for - especially when it comes to statistics.

Cycloptichorn

"merit" can be manufactured in many of these cases. medicine is not an exact science. doctors often have different opinions on the same thing. one can manufacture the "merit" by finding a doctor that disagrees with the treating physician's choice.

That's not how the law is written...

well by all means, tell us how the law is written.

Why not do some homework?

USAFHokie80 wrote:

Miller wrote:

Quote:

they view doctors as some sort of infallible super-person that is not allowed to screw up.

That's how pharmacists are viewed today, by the general public in the USA, so why not the MDs?
That's also why registered pharmacists carry no less than $3 million in liability insurance.

i'd say there is a huge difference between a pharmacist and a physician. pharmacists do not diagnose, treat or prescribe. the do not operate or perform procedures. doctors have a lot more on their plate. i personally cannot even think of a scenario in which a pharmacist can be sued except if he filled the prescription with the wrong dose or wrong med altogether.

It appears that you're a new comer to the REAL WORLD!

USAFHokie80 wrote:

Miller wrote:

USAFHokie80 wrote:

Miller wrote:

Quote:

dward Amsler, of the Medical Liability Mutual Insurance Co., says most of the blame lies with the tens of millions of dollars New York juries award families of disabled children.

NYPost

The blame? Shouldn't the blame be directed towards the physicians who make the mistakes, that cause the disabilities of the children and others?

Why blame the Jury?

that is VERY subjective. physicians are people too, and they make mistakes. have you ever thought about how much stress they are under? to expect them to never make a mistake is crazy. that being said, i imagine a lot of these cases are not that a physician actually caused an issue but that the parent didn't like the outcome or took a chance and it turned out badly. nothing is medicine is guaranteed. for ABSOLUTELY ANY procedure, there is a risk, and sometimes that risk includes death. that is why before any of that, patients are provided with information on what is going to be done and made aware of the risk. they are made to sign an acknowledgment of the risk prior to. a lot of these people took the gamble and lost. that is not the fault of the physician. now, i realize there have been serious mistakes made and for those i offer no defense. however, in many of these cases, i'm not sure that having a trial by jury is a good thing. a jury will almost always side with the plaintiff because they feel sorry for them or because they view doctors as some sort of infallible super-person that is not allowed to screw up.

How would you like to support a disabled child, the result of a "mistake" by an MD, over the span of the child's life for a cost of minimally $10 million?

do you have a source providing the cost estimate as a *minimum* of $10M for a disabled child?

by the way, the theme of that post was that there is risk inherent in ALL medicine and that even if a doctor does everything right with respect to what we know in medical science, there still exists the possibility that it could end badly for the patient. if that is the case, the doctor should not be sued.

You should be able to calculate this estimate on your own, but I'll give you a little help. If a baby is born severly disabled, needs round the clock nursing care from an NA ( cost of $25/hr not factoring in inflation ) and the time element is figured at 90-95 years post birth, the total amount just for nursing care ( minimally ) is $2,268,000.
Now factor in for a period of 90 years: physical therapy, education expense,
medication expense, supplies expense, medical care not covered by heath insurance, health insurance, nutrition expense of infusions from registered pharmacist ( in home), specialized diet epense,ongoing rehab expense as child matures to adulthood, special vehicle expense for patient transport, modification of household to accomodate developing child/adult...etc. Include now legal fees . financial fees and cost of household and extraneous medical expenses>

Factor in the effect of inflation and you'll come up with a total of at least $10 million.

georgeob1 wrote:

Perhaps true as well. However, the life expectency of a healthy, non-disabled person born at the same time is a good deal less than 90 years.

These are calculations a lawyer, who is attempting to maximize the unjustifiable return to his plaintif client (and the share of them he will collect) might make. However they are laughably indefensible from a rational economic or demographic viewpoint. Sadly however, this kind of foolishness does indeed sometimes prevail among juries and even judges in our very litigious system.

No...these are calulations based on the reality of medical cost
of rearing a disabled baby to adulthood. Why deny it?

Prescription Error

Prescription errors are tragic and entirely preventable mistakes that can cost lives. They may be caused by doctors or pharmacists, and it has been estimated that as many as 7,000 deaths occur annually in the United States from incorrect prescriptions.

Prescription errors may occur when the wrong drug is prescribed, the wrong drug is given, an incorrect dose is provided, or drug interactions are not taken into account. Pharmacists and other medical professionals have a responsibility to prevent malpractice and exercise extra care and caution when prescribing drugs and filling prescriptions. When these priorities are overlooked the health of the patient is put into question.

If you are a victim of a prescription error it is important that you understand your rights. You do not deserve to receive poor medical attention, and if you act quickly, you may be able to collect compensation for your pain and suffering. Let an understanding pharmacy malpractice lawyer help you get the justice you deserve. Contact a pharmacy malpractice lawyer today.

hbg, It's not restricted to doctors and pharmacists; it's also nurses.