Comments on: Doctors and lawyers agree on a malpractice bill

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Wed, 23 May 2007 22:01:00 +0000

Physicians absolutely can and do establish standards of care.

Health court precedent would not provide any more advantages than precedents from courts today. As physicians will tell you, every patient is different, and that's what makes it difficult. Not to mention that the standard of care also varies by locale. Health courts aren't going to change those facts.

The analogy to backdoor damage caps, ie. health courts is right on.

By: Ted F.

Ted F. — Wed, 23 May 2007 06:21:00 +0000

The analogy to health courts is incorrect. Physicians cannot establish standards of care, because the physician cannot trust that an expert witness will not contradict him in hindsight. Health court precedent would provide advantages in this regard.

By: The Independent Urologist

The Independent Urologist — Tue, 22 May 2007 14:21:00 +0000

I agree with Ted F. Personally, I’d prefer to take my chances in front of a jury than in front on 1 individual, without the ability to appeal his decision.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Tue, 22 May 2007 12:50:00 +0000

That’s kind of like the claims that health courts are needed to establish “standards of care”. Physicians can do that now without health courts.

By: Ted F.

Ted F. — Tue, 22 May 2007 08:40:00 +0000

The bill, as described, does absolutely nothing: if the plaintiff and defendant agree to arbitrate, they can arbitrate–but they can do that now without the bill.