If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Washington Post)   Rick Santorum: We need to cap medical malpractice awards to $250,000. World: Didn't you file a $500,000 malpractice suit against your wife's chiropractor in 1999? Santorum: That was different   (washingtonpost.com) divider line 216
    More: Obvious, Rick Santorum, medical malpractice, Karen Garver Santorum, forensic biologist, malpractice, herniated disk, malpractice suit, trial court  
•       •       •

17193 clicks; posted to Main » on 30 Jan 2012 at 9:48 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



216 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-01-30 09:49:34 AM
Please. Everyone knows chiropractic isn't medicine!
 
2012-01-30 09:50:33 AM
Done in one. Turn out the lights on your way out of the thread, folks.
 
2012-01-30 09:50:57 AM
Just pray harder, Rick.
 
2012-01-30 09:51:00 AM
Her pain was real. She wasn't trying to milk the system, unlike all those lazy liberals in Philly who are driving up the cost of our health insurance
 
2012-01-30 09:51:13 AM
Rick Santorum is a douchebag. More at 11.
 
2012-01-30 09:51:17 AM
Republican politicans are allowed to do things that normal people should not be allowed to do.
 
2012-01-30 09:51:39 AM
If we have learned anything about Rick Santorum, it's that it's different when it's him.
 
2012-01-30 09:51:42 AM
Small government. Deregulation. Fiscal conservatism.

/fark this lot
 
2012-01-30 09:52:22 AM
Of course there needs to be reform in malpractice lawsuits, yes, but doesn't capping do a bit too much to protect physicians? 250k won't cover much for the uninsured if they need to use those funds to repair damage done,
 
2012-01-30 09:52:51 AM
But, but, but. . . Gay men have buttsex!!!!

And, um. . . Liberals kill babies!!!

/Santorum in 2012
 
2012-01-30 09:53:32 AM
Meh, I think pain and suffering should be eliminated because it is just a bullshiat way to put emotion into a lawsuit, which is completely subjective to how the jury responds to an emotional plea. If something happens and you need a lifetime of care, fine then get your couple million or whatever will provide you care and move on. You are a complete waste of space to sue for an additional million on TOP of getting you condition taken care of just because of "suffering". I'm sure pain meds are rolled into your lifetime of care.
 
2012-01-30 09:53:48 AM
I got mine so screw you.
 
2012-01-30 09:54:39 AM

Fabric_Man: Please. Everyone knows chiropractic isn't medicine!


this.


does it even count a medical malpractice then?
 
2012-01-30 09:55:06 AM

violetvolume: If we have learned anything about Rick Santorum ANY politician, it's that it's different when it's him.

 
2012-01-30 09:56:31 AM
It's Ok If You're A Republican.
 
2012-01-30 09:56:41 AM
As much as I loathe Santorum and everything he stands for, isn't this like arguing that Jon Stewart is a hypocrite for advocating higher taxes on the rich if he himself pays 15% (or 20% or whatever) on his income?

It's an invalid argument in either case.
 
2012-01-30 09:56:56 AM
kbronsito: does it even count a medical malpractice then?

Good question. I don't think you can sue a chiropractor for medical malpractice anymore than you can sue a squeege guy if your brakes fail.
 
2012-01-30 09:57:05 AM
Jesus freak a hypocrite?!?!?!

That's unpossible!
 
2012-01-30 09:58:02 AM

PsyLord: violetvolume: If we have learned anything about Rick Santorum ANY politician, it's that it's different when it's him.



But with Santorum, it's about anal sex. I think he's taken a fancy to Bachmann's husband.
 
2012-01-30 09:58:46 AM

threedingers: isn't this like arguing that Jon Stewart is a hypocrite for advocating higher taxes on the rich if he himself pays 15%



No.
 
2012-01-30 09:59:59 AM

threedingers: As much as I loathe Santorum and everything he stands for, isn't this like arguing that Jon Stewart is a hypocrite for advocating higher taxes on the rich if he himself pays 15% (or 20% or whatever) on his income?

It's an invalid argument in either case.


Um, realizing this is derailing a bit, but how is it hypocritical of Jon Stewart to advocate raising taxes on himself? Now, if he had said "raise taxes on all the rich but me" he'd be a hypocrite. The reality, however, is that you're throwing out a strawman and your skills of logic and deductive reasoning fall somewhere below the level of Trig Palin.
 
2012-01-30 10:00:07 AM
I wonder if it's kinda like having an affair with an abortion doctor or something.

Lord, what fools these mortals be.
 
2012-01-30 10:00:29 AM
He is suing because he now can't go at his wife from behind, and have to resort to male prostitutes?

Where is the money for that going to come from?!?!??! Huh? Tell me?
 
2012-01-30 10:00:35 AM
His wife's partial birth abortion was different too.
 
2012-01-30 10:02:34 AM

hailin: Meh, I think pain and suffering should be eliminated because it is just a bullshiat way to put emotion into a lawsuit, which is completely subjective to how the jury responds to an emotional plea. If something happens and you need a lifetime of care, fine then get your couple million or whatever will provide you care and move on. You are a complete waste of space to sue for an additional million on TOP of getting you condition taken care of just because of "suffering". I'm sure pain meds are rolled into your lifetime of care.


We have smart and funny buttons, but why not an asshole button?
 
2012-01-30 10:03:02 AM
A hypocritical republican?

Is it a day that ends in "y"?
 
2012-01-30 10:03:37 AM
Fine. As long as we cap medical bills at the same.

No? Then nothing doing. Do these people have no concept of why people sue for malpractice? My own grandmother had to sue just to get her surgery bills paid after the doctors farked up- around $50,000 for the surgery plus an ungodly amount for drugs, recuperative therapy, and other problems that complicated her existing medical conditions. Bonus- both her sons are doctors who knew exactly where and how he had farked up, and why he shouldn't have.

$250,000 is nothing for some people who have had doctors make mistakes in treating them. Remove the wrong limb? We're talking about a lifetime of prosthetics and potentially lost income.
 
2012-01-30 10:03:40 AM
That was then
This is now.
 
2012-01-30 10:04:07 AM
tax cuts for the wealthy will fix this.
 
2012-01-30 10:04:11 AM

LazarusLong42: His wife's partial birth abortion was different too.


And that time he stuck his tongue up a dude's asshole in a San Fransisco bathhouse
 
2012-01-30 10:04:47 AM
In a sane world Rick Santorum wouldn't be able to hold a seat on the Potato Salad Task Force of the Church Picnic Committee, yet here and now there are literally millions of idiots who think he'd make a fine president. Thankfully not nearly enough millions of idiots to get Rick elected, but, still.

As I've said before -- Pennsylvanians tried to warn you about Rick when we FINALLY stepped up and handed him the most historic beating in our election history. As bone-dumb, petty and hypocritical as you think Rick Santorum is, he's much, much worse.
 
2012-01-30 10:04:48 AM

hailin: Meh, I think pain and suffering should be eliminated because it is just a bullshiat way to put emotion into a lawsuit, which is completely subjective to how the jury responds to an emotional plea. If something happens and you need a lifetime of care, fine then get your couple million or whatever will provide you care and move on. You are a complete waste of space to sue for an additional million on TOP of getting you condition taken care of just because of "suffering". I'm sure pain meds are rolled into your lifetime of care.


I can think of a few examples, off of the top of my head, where pain and suffering was the sole reason for the lawsuit, and they are not all unwarranted. Pain, or suffering, are very valid reasons to seek legal enforcement of justice.

Why wouldn't you be compensated for pain and suffering? What if, I don't know, Ford decided to let a defect go through that harms the users by exploding tailpipe syndrome or whatever, because repairing it would cost more than to settle lawsuis. Now, say I bought said car, and was subsequently sent to the hospital, and followed with 5+ years of physical therapy, in which i lose my job, spouse, and home. If ford were to simply reimburse me for my car, medical bills, and home, I would be a zero sum gain, right?

So, Ford gets to just recoup my financial losses, but I get nothing for the 5+ years of suffering I went through, or the continual suffering of the long term consequences?

I believe you may be a bit shortsighted or perhaps swayed by some pundits, but pain and suffering isn't some gimmie gotcha clause that 'those types' use to make a quick buck.

Besides.....reffering to your example, how many civil lawsuits are decided by a jury trial? I was under the impression that it was generally a one judge kinda deal.
 
2012-01-30 10:04:53 AM
The only reason Santorum hasn't "resigned his campaign" yet is because the GOP needs him to make Romney and Gingrich look more appealing.

Think about that for a minute.
 
2012-01-30 10:05:31 AM

hailin: Meh, I think pain and suffering should be eliminated because it is just a bullshiat way to put emotion into a lawsuit, which is completely subjective to how the jury responds to an emotional plea. If something happens and you need a lifetime of care, fine then get your couple million or whatever will provide you care and move on. You are a complete waste of space to sue for an additional million on TOP of getting you condition taken care of just because of "suffering". I'm sure pain meds are rolled into your lifetime of care.


Damages that are not capped are measured by pecuniary loss due to the disability, and cost of care. Eliminating pain and suffering damages pretty much ensures that only the rich will get any kind of just compensation. Which, if you read the later part of this article, is pretty much what Santorum's woman was up to. She had little pain and suffering, but went after $500K as a pecuniary loss.

Is it fair that only the rich get just compensation for their injuries? How much is a person's lifetime of pain and suffering worth?

What if the doctor was grossly negligent: amputating the wrong leg, resulting in both legs being amputated? Should a poor guy receive next to nothing when an anesthesiologist puts the breathing tube down the esophagus instead of the trachia, in an otherwise simple operation, leaving the guy a virtual vegetable for life?
 
2012-01-30 10:05:47 AM

Lipo: threedingers: As much as I loathe Santorum and everything he stands for, isn't this like arguing that Jon Stewart is a hypocrite for advocating higher taxes on the rich if he himself pays 15% (or 20% or whatever) on his income?

It's an invalid argument in either case.

Um, realizing this is derailing a bit, but how is it hypocritical of Jon Stewart to advocate raising taxes on himself? Now, if he had said "raise taxes on all the rich but me" he'd be a hypocrite. The reality, however, is that you're throwing out a strawman and your skills of logic and deductive reasoning fall somewhere below the level of Trig Palin.


That's my point. Stewart isn't hypocritical, as was pointed out at great length in last week's thread (new window). Nor is Santorum in this case, if you apply the same logic.
 
2012-01-30 10:05:52 AM
There should be a punitive side to obvious and wanton malpractice/negligence, but the victim shouldn't get that money. Maybe it should go to a fund to help represent indigent victims, or something like that. People shouldn't see potential lawsuits as a profit center.
 
2012-01-30 10:05:55 AM
kbronsito: "does it even count a medical malpractice then?"

And yet the court allowed it, raising the question of whether you could sue any other "alternative medicine" practitioner for failing to deliver results.
 
2012-01-30 10:06:32 AM
I am all for bashing Rick Santorum because I think he's an awful human being, but I think there is a fairly reasonable discussion to be had about malpractice reform.

Can anyone with more familiarity of the subject weight in on the pros/cons of this?
 
2012-01-30 10:06:35 AM
the whole malpractice cap stuff is a red herring anyways. just like tort reform was. The cost of malpractice suits against healthcare in general is not the cause for expensive healthcare. of course, capping it would bring down malpractice insurance a little bit, that small amount is negligible to the overall cost of healthcare in general.

It's like attacking NPR's budget in an attempt to reduce national debt. you're going after the smallest part of the issue.

however, the doctor's lobbies and insurance lobbies really want a cap, so, as a politician, you can get a lot of funding and clout with the healthcare professional industries by promoting a protectionist practice to cover their asses from wrongdoing.

the high cost of malpractice is the only way of forcing doctors to give a damn about failure. You take that a way and their will have less safeguards and more mistakes born of laziness.

/ but, that's politics. create insignificant solutions to massive problems because a lobby wants it from you and your constituents are too lazy to do their own research
 
2012-01-30 10:06:39 AM
See... he really loves his wife, he doesnt even know your wife's name
 
2012-01-30 10:06:43 AM
We need to get the shareholders for profit idea out of health care first.

The real problem with healthcare is this before anything else. You just talk to a doctor for 2 minutes and they most likely all ready rung up what it took you a whole week to make...and that not the including the corporate middle men
 
2012-01-30 10:07:01 AM
To follow up on my comment, being a medical professional can reap high rewards. Removing the business risk of such a profession leaves it wide open for bad practices.
 
2012-01-30 10:07:27 AM

Mr. Coffee Nerves: In a sane world Rick Santorum wouldn't be able to hold a seat on the Potato Salad Task Force of the Church Picnic Committee, yet here and now there are literally millions of idiots who think he'd make a fine president. Thankfully not nearly enough millions of idiots to get Rick elected, but, still.

As I've said before -- Pennsylvanians tried to warn you about Rick when we FINALLY stepped up and handed him the most historic beating in our election history. As bone-dumb, petty and hypocritical as you think Rick Santorum is, he's much, much worse.


Y'all need to pay attention to that last sentence there. It's one of the most reality based things I've ever read on FARK
 
2012-01-30 10:07:41 AM

Lipo: threedingers: As much as I loathe Santorum and everything he stands for, isn't this like arguing that Jon Stewart is a hypocrite for advocating higher taxes on the rich if he himself pays 15% (or 20% or whatever) on his income?

It's an invalid argument in either case.

Um, realizing this is derailing a bit, but how is it hypocritical of Jon Stewart to advocate raising taxes on himself? Now, if he had said "raise taxes on all the rich but me" he'd be a hypocrite. The reality, however, is that you're throwing out a strawman and your skills of logic and deductive reasoning fall somewhere below the level of Trig Palin.


That's a requirement to work at Fox News.

It's also an insult to Trig Palin.
 
2012-01-30 10:07:44 AM

TimonC346: Of course there needs to be reform in malpractice lawsuits, yes, but doesn't capping do a bit too much to protect physicians? 250k won't cover much for the uninsured if they need to use those funds to repair damage done,


As the son of a woman who has had 20 years of medical issues as the result of an incompetent doctor I can tell you right now that 250k can be pissed away in a single day.

My mother lost her suit though, because while the docs fixing her would openly admit to how badly this original guy farked her up, they wouldn't say it in front of a judge. They all feared this guy hanging them out to dry down the road too much.

As a result my father is 67 and can't retire because they need his insurance to pay her medical bills

There needs to be some kind of reform, but I have no idea how to fix it. Healthy people can work the system and injured people get farked.
 
2012-01-30 10:08:25 AM
Chiropractor. I'm sure she was in for some frequent adjustments... if you know what I mean.
 
2012-01-30 10:08:42 AM
I have a real low tolerance for religious farkwads who chastise things that they themselves always seem to have a convenient excuse for.
 
2012-01-30 10:08:55 AM
Nice try Rick, but you should have brought this up earlier as Newt and Mitt pretty much have the "hypocrite vote" of the GOP locked up.
 
2012-01-30 10:09:00 AM
I think you all might be missing the point....

IS THE JUDGE A DAMN ACTIVIST JUDGE OR A PATRIOTIC ALL-AMERICAN JUDGE?
 
2012-01-30 10:09:12 AM

TheChemist: Fine. As long as we cap medical bills at the same.

No? Then nothing doing. Do these people have no concept of why people sue for malpractice? My own grandmother had to sue just to get her surgery bills paid after the doctors farked up- around $50,000 for the surgery plus an ungodly amount for drugs, recuperative therapy, and other problems that complicated her existing medical conditions. Bonus- both her sons are doctors who knew exactly where and how he had farked up, and why he shouldn't have.

$250,000 is nothing for some people who have had doctors make mistakes in treating them. Remove the wrong limb? We're talking about a lifetime of prosthetics and potentially lost income.



i234.photobucket.com
 
Displayed 50 of 216 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report