Quote:
Originally Posted by serenityseeker
Simply put you are wrong, and with all due respect out of touch with the subject as it exists in todays world.
If you want to use the courtroom as the example of what's wrong, let's look at the participants. Everyone in the courtroom that matters - judge and jury members alike - in the last couple of generations has sat sick or hurt in a physician's office, waiting for what seemed like a dog's age before being seen, and then feeling like they were rushed through the event and treated as less-than-human, and oftentimes as an inconvenience and a whiner. The 1991 movie "The Doctor" starring William Hurt (ironically) had more truth than fiction in the eyes of potential jurists.
To generalize all physicians in this matter is innaccurate and irresponsible. Do you have any idea why wait times are long, why visits are rushed, and why so many doctors are leaving the fold? No, you obviously don't. And your movie reference is a great example of people being swayed by the media and making poorly informed decisions based on such.
Are there lawyers who can take advantage of this poor physician-customer relationship? Sure there are. And for those who handle medical malpractice cases, business is booming - and it's ALL based on the total lack of positive personal relationships between the physician and customer, as people don't sue those they have grown to love and respect and trust. Where there are good personal relationships, people work out any problem without dragging it into court, each armed with "hired guns."
"All"?? That statement in and of itself deprives the post of credibility. Again, no disrespect, simply stating the facts. Absolute statements are rarely accurate, and unless you have struggled to survive in this environment you have no accurate basis for such an outlandish claim. Tens of thousands of people involved in this legal morass/lottery system live every day with the reality that no matter how good they are, how thorough or compassionate, there is ALWAYS an attorney willing to scrounge nuisance money from health care providers and insurance companies. That is reality, that is truth. I have seen many colleagues mowed down by this process, most of them kind, caring and empathetic physicians. And good interpersonal relationships don't hold a candle to jackpot money. Patients have even apologized to physicians as they stated they knew the doc did no wrong, but this was their chance for money.
Physicians have access to considerable marketing support and exceptional psychological services to portray them as angels in white smocks. Not sure where you get that, I can't even begin to fathom. Access how, and with who, and who would pay for all this etherial support? Give me a break.
As someone that appears well read and very intelligent I expected more from you. Little or none of what you say above has basis in fact, it is conjecture and anectdotal, with a lot of idealized memories. If you truly want to accurately comment and contribute do some research, talk with and spend some time with those you so freely castigate. Walk a couple of miles in the shoes of health care providers so that you may accurately comment.
Why do I even care? Because frankly you insult me and many of my colleagues that do what we do with honor and compassion every day. We have and continue to sacrifice personally, emotionally, spritually and financially in an effort to truly personify what a physician should be, and we are NOT the minority. I also will not stand by while more and more misinformation on such an important subject is bandied about.
|
I'm the first to admit how often I can be wrong. But, just a little, you may not be totally right, either.
However, I do know why people sue. When the technical jargon is stripped away, the underlying story is almost always the same - disrespect, disbelief and lack of trust.
The "jackpot" mentality does exist, but why? How does one convince a population that there is going to be no gain to such suits because the suit will fail due to jury empathy with the physician? And until the medical profession can regain that public confidence, juries will continue to see the suing party as one-of-their-own and the physician as the outsider. That is not right in any sense of the law, but it is what happens.
Are there attorneys who encourage and take cases they shouldn't? Yes! No profession is perfect. Just as there are physicians who perform needless tests for no medical reason, but do so as back-up evidence in case they are sued, and that small minority of others who practice money-collection rather than medicine. We all wish we could rid ourselves of the scurrilous minority in the professions who gets the bulwark of the publicity and we all defend against.
The "walk a couple miles in my shoes" comment goes both ways. I've seen the public after-the-litigious-event and am only sharing what I have received. Of course there are dedicated medical professionals, as there are dedicated all-kinds-of-professionals (including lawyers). However, not wanting to recognize
why a problem exists usually results in no change in the situation - or worse.
There was never an intent to insult. And I'm sure your comments regarding lawyers were not meant either as a castigation of the entire legal profession. We all need to examine our professional worlds for where they work, are out of kilter, and where change is necessary for the betterment of all. We are indeed proud of those within our profession - and that is a large majority - who perform ethically and admirably every day. We also loathe those who put us in the position of having to purge them from our ranks and explain to a confused public why these slugs have licenses.
So, if the medical profession sincerely wants to reduce malpractice claims, talk to those to whom the claimants come for the
why and
how of these claims. When we work together, and willing to amend how we do business accordingly so claims are prevented versus litigated, then costs are indeed affected for everyone.