Monday, April 04, 2005
Why lawyers object having a physician on a malpractice screening panel
"Lawyers argue that a doctor's presence on the board, if only by dint of having special knowledge, would prejudice the proceeding against patients. They want claims screened by a single judge experienced in such cases, a proposal that's anathema to physicians."
Again I ask, how are non-physicians supposed to determine what is malpractice? Perhaps I'll go to a lawyer for my next physical instead - they claim to know as much medicine as physicians anyways.
"Lawyers argue that a doctor's presence on the board, if only by dint of having special knowledge, would prejudice the proceeding against patients. They want claims screened by a single judge experienced in such cases, a proposal that's anathema to physicians."
Again I ask, how are non-physicians supposed to determine what is malpractice? Perhaps I'll go to a lawyer for my next physical instead - they claim to know as much medicine as physicians anyways.
Posted by Kevin |
link
| Comments (5)
| 
Comments:
The preening arrogance of doctors makes me sick. Of course, doctors have a class-prejudice towards their own. That's why they shouldn't serve on screening panels.
Let the lawyers and judges handle what goes on in courts and let the doctors handle what goes on in the hospital.
Seems reasonable?
Let the lawyers and judges handle what goes on in courts and let the doctors handle what goes on in the hospital.
Seems reasonable?
# posted by 
: 8:04 PM
: 8:04 PM
Anon,
as reasonable as a bunch of doctors as the panel for your legal malpractice case.
GuntDoc
as reasonable as a bunch of doctors as the panel for your legal malpractice case.
GuntDoc
# posted by : 3:54 AM
: 3:54 AM
Are you questioning the objectivity of judges--who provide the model of administration of justice to the world. Plus, not all judges are lawyers.
# posted by : 10:36 AM
: 10:36 AM
I don't question their objectivity, but their qualification. How many judges have the knowledge to properly handle matters of medicine? It stands to reason that, even as a judge provides to a malpractice case understanding of the law, a doctor should be on hand to provide the required medical expertise.
# posted by : 6:58 PM
: 6:58 PM
Malpractice is not a medical concept. It is a legal standard based on medical facts. Lawyers are much more qualified at determining what constitues med mal than are doctors.
These medical facts are simply not that mysterious and can be fairly well understood by someone with patience, intelligence, and a basic background in science.
Further, as a statistician who often consults on med mal cases, I find doctors remarkably ignorant about risk, risk assessment--even basic probability. These are what you need to know if you want to evaluate med mal.
Post a Comment
These medical facts are simply not that mysterious and can be fairly well understood by someone with patience, intelligence, and a basic background in science.
Further, as a statistician who often consults on med mal cases, I find doctors remarkably ignorant about risk, risk assessment--even basic probability. These are what you need to know if you want to evaluate med mal.
# posted by : 9:11 PM
: 9:11 PM
