NationStates Jolt Archive

I'm interested to see if anyone has any idea why this country has become so sue-crazy. One of the people that works in the lab with me is a surgeon and he told me a story about a friend of his the other day.

The friend was performing a laproscopic colonoscopy. Basically, in any laproscopic procedure, they poke a couple of really small holes in your skin to stick in a little camera and tools to do something. Well, with this procedure there is a well-known 10% risk of injuring the greater bile duct. This means simply that it will definitely happen in about 10% of the procedures performed. Usually, the injury is not noticed until after the procedure, and lots of problems ensue. However, this particular surgeon noticed during the procedure, which meant that he had to go ahead and make an incision in order to repair the injured bile duct. There are absolutely no lasting effects to the woman, other than that I suppose she probably has a small scar due to having to be opened up.

She sued. The jury ultimately awarded $20 million. Now, tell me this, under what circumstances does a woman with absolutley no lasting effects need twenty million dollars for a complication that is a KNOWN RISK in this procedure?! Under what circumstances would she need twenty million even if it wasn't a known risk?

Seriously, does anyone else think things like this need to stop?

Well, there's nothing better than never having to work agan cuz you got a cut on your arm.

Ok, I can think of 14 people that need to be lined up and shot:

The Judge for not throwing it out

The woman for being a money grubbing idiot

and the jury of 12 for falling for that crap, they are obviously morons.

in a similar operation, a man i know had such a bad outcome that they had to reconstruct his esophagusn and it was expected that he wouldnt live one year afterwards (he has since lived more than 10 years)
the jury gave him nothing in his malpractice suit

its all in who's on the jury eh?

Ok, I can think of 14 people that need to be lined up and shot:

The Judge for not throwing it out

Believe it or not, the jury originally came back with a verdict of 15 million. The judge told them that such a high sum was outrageous, and to go back into deliberations. Then they came back out with the 20 million. I guess he didn't feel sending them back again would be smart.

The woman for being a money grubbing idiot

I agree.

and the jury of 12 for falling for that crap, they are obviously morons.

I agree, but the populace as a whole seems to think that any doctor has lots of money to throw around and thus are smug bastards that need to be punished.

heres my solution

institute a panel of judges to oversee all cases brought up to ask for monetary reimbursements. this "court" would decide whether or not the lawsuit is frivolous and able to god to court. if it is deemed frivolous it is thrown out and the plaintiff and lawyer are fined

they are obviously morons.
Wow, if you're just now realizing that most Americans (and i am one) are idiots, then I must ask "Where the hell have you been?"


I'm 15 YEARS OLD, and I'm smarter than most of my teachers!!

Frivolous lawsuits? In America?

NAhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh....

Speaking of which, I just strained my left eyeball reading your post. It was those two words that you unneccessarily screamed out in all-caps that caused the problem as my eyeballs were not expecting it in an otherwirse reasonably written entry.

Please be advised that my lawyer will be contacting you shortly in order to discuss settlement of damages to future earning, and future enjoyment of *ahem* adult visual materials due to the lasting damage that this might have caused.....

:D

haha it's not just Americans. On an Australian beach a sign was set up to tell people not to use drugs on the beach and if they did they would be prosecuted etc. A druggie later fell over and hurt himself on the sign and successfully sued for tortious damages...classic

I blame this on the anticapitalist mindset. People automatically assume that rich doctors have too much wealth... and should redistribute it, by court trial, to the unwashed, ignorant and stupid masses who didn't earn it. Hooray for "equality."

Litigeous! The word's litigeous! :mad:

PS: The US legal system is weird! :eek:

PPS: Does anyone know how damages are calculated under US law? In Austalia, they are intended to attempt to put the plaintiff in the same position they were in before the damage occured, as far as money can do so. For example, if you became a quadruplegic and were unable to work as a result of another person's negligence, that person would be required to pay for, amongst other things: The wages you could have reasonably been expected to work for the time the injury affected you (ie. the rest of your life in this case)
Medical expenses
The reasonable cost of having someone care for you
Other out-of-pocket expenses

Based on these principles, the quantum of damages awarded by US courts seems rather excessive. :confused:

Can anyone clarify this.