Off-Topic: Why no tort reform
(Bear Creek Reservoir Specific)
9 messages
Updated 11/3/2023 6:12:58 AM
Lakes Online Forum
84,091 messages
Updated 11/8/2024 10:28:12 AM
Lakes Online Forum
5,204 messages
Updated 9/14/2024 10:10:50 AM
(Bear Creek Reservoir Specific)
0 messages
Updated
Lakes Online Forum
4,172 messages
Updated 9/9/2024 5:04:44 PM
Lakes Online Forum
4,262 messages
Updated 11/6/2024 6:43:09 PM
Lakes Online Forum
2,979 messages
Updated 6/26/2024 5:03:03 AM
Lakes Online Forum
98 messages
Updated 4/15/2024 1:00:58 AM
|
|
|
|
Name:
|
JustAGuy
-
|
Subject:
|
Why no tort reform
|
Date:
|
8/15/2009 10:41:20 PM
|
|
I may be wrong, but I think what Obama has said is that he is against caps on malpractice suits. I believe he stated this while addressing the AMA and it's doctors. For instance, if a child is permanently disabled due to malpractice, and that child faces millions of dollars of health care expenses for the rest of their life, Obama does not want to see a cap on what that family could get in a settlement.
I think what Obama is for, is that if the health care providers did everything that is widely accepted as the correct way to handle a certain medical situation, then those health care providers should have some protection from liability. I'm not familiar with John Edwards cerebral palsy birth cases, but if it is as it was presented in an earlier post - if the doctors delivering babies follow all of the accepted procedures, then they would be protected from liability.
If someone challenges my post, I will try to go back and re-research my information. (Well, someone besides WW) :)
|
|