Might want to review the case law in this state regarding this matter. Once a pregnancy reaches a certain time frame (weeks) they are considered to be individuals. I believe this time frame may be around 30-32 weeks. Usually they use the standard if the baby could be removed from the mother and reasonably sustain life (with help of medicine) they are considered to be individuals.
I handled auto claims for 15 years and this was the threshold we had to use in handling injury claims. I have been out of the business for about 5 years so the exact time frame is unclear. Also, due to the time of the pregnancy, ABORTION is not an option. Most states would consider this murder.
Almost makes me wish I were a doctor so I could review the facts with some hope of coming to a reasonable conclusion. The initial reading for me sounds like sympathetic jury and someone just won the litigation lottery. Tragic stuff though.
I wonder why there was 6 to 8 hours of delay when the baby was in distress. Also, it sounds as though the baby was delivered vaginally (forceps)in stead of C-Section. I don’t think we have been given the entire story here.
You never are given the whole story. Any mistakes doctors make are kept secret, and the patients aren’t told. Doctors are great at surgery but they don’t know much about how to deliver a baby. In fact most of the time a doctor does something during delivery it makes things worse, such as breaking the water, giving drugs to speed up the delivery and needless cesareans (25% of all births are cesarean now). Women who get induced are commonly scheduled to be induced at midnight for no other reason than to allow the doctor to come in at 8am in the next morning to deliver the baby. We give doctors too much authority and they are rarely if ever questioned. Whenever you have someone who has ‘unquestioned’ authority they will invariably abuse that authority. Just like you should question what professor tells you in college, question what the media prints, and question on occasion the conduct of the police, you should also question what your doctors says and verify based on your own research.
I say let’s see how many “defects” deformaties and deaths occur during deliver without the presence of a Doctor… Yes there are risks with any pregancy, yes there are “errors” in judgement (basically, isn’t that what makes us human?) and yes there are going to be serious consequences. I’m tired of everyone blaming the doctors for the outcome of much of these posts – Let’s have all of the OBGyn’s quit doing deliveries and see what happens then.
I had a very risky delivery – after 8 hours and because my DR didn’t believe in forecepts, went the C-Section route – with a paralizing epidural, nicked spinal column and complications – but I never once thought of a lawsuit…
Where we would we be without Dr’s ? They’re not perfect – I’d like to see anyone say they were –
If I had my choice between a DR and a LAWYER – there’s no question who I would choose – The men and women who dedicate themselves to do what they can to make things right and attempt to keep us ticking know that every waking hour they are assuming “risk” – We should do the same – Life is a risk..
I just had a relative give birth and they induced her to the point that she gave birth HOURS earlier than anyone expected. She was in labor ONLY three and half hours and expected to go 18. Just twenty minutes more and my aunt would have been delivering the baby. Thank God her doctor hadn’t gone to lunch like she had planned. My cousin was centimeter dilated and an hour and a half later, fully dilated. Yes, question EVERYTHING. It’s the closest a woman comes to death without dying and you had better check every angle.
I feel so sorry for this family. It will take a few million just for the care alone. “Healthy” babies already can put a strain on budgets and this family did not deserve this. On the other hand I feel sorry for OBGYNS. They have alot on them but then too more needs to be done to make sure that nothing goes wrong. Just because every delivery is supposedly different does not mean that you make a God-complex call.
Agree with wa. Coupled with the comments this woman had some issues prior to the delivery, lastbat may be on point with a sympathy verdict. Faced with lifetime care for tragic cases…..the issue always becomes “who is going to pay”. The sad part is what quality of life is all this money going to buy? Doesn’t sound like much but our society isn’t ready to face any alternatives. Considering skyrocketing costs, I believe there will come a time when hard decisions will have to made about how much care will be allocated to persons with no hope for any quality of life. That’s frightening.
We always hear about the “bad” stories of doctors and surgeries gone wrong, and many people are quick to jump on the “doctors have a god complex” bandwagon. But for every “bad” story, there are thousands of “happy ending” stories that you never hear about. Think about that the next time you want to bash doctors. Chances are, you know of someone who is alive today due to the miraculous work of a doctor.
We have got to get to a point in our American Society that we learn to take responsibility for our own lives. Life isn’t fair and there are going to be bad things that happen to us that quite possibly could have been caused by someone else’s negligence, or perhaps they weren’t negligent, but your have the better lawyer and he convinces a jury that they were negligent. Just because bad things happen to us, that doesn’t give us the “right to sue”. Uh oh, my kids was out in the street and was hit by a car and I probably just won the lotery, read that as the chance to sue and get rich. Doctors are goingto make mistakes now and then. We are human and humans make mistakes. Rising healthcare costs and insurance premiums are affected by our society’s refusal to understand that sopmetimes bad things are going to happen and we need to understand that and get on with life, instead of trying to find someone to blame.
I agree with Joey – it’s just the way it is…we never get to hear about the good things that the medical professionals get done. These days, we just like to focus on all the bad.
Being that the mother had some pre-existing issues that were complicating her pregnancy, unless we know the entire medical history, we really shouldn’t be commenting on how the doctor’s performed.
Willy,
That was funny! Thanks for the laugh! However, what’s even funnier / scarier is that some people REALLY think this way. Don’t question doctors as to why surgery and treatment cost so much. Question the insurance companies that charge ridiculous premiums for malpractice insurance, which is in response to the ridiculous lawsuits filed against doctors. See how it’s cyclical???
I am confused by some of the comments.
First there are great doctors and what may surprise you all, there are great lawyers, just maybe not as many.
People should be reponsible for their actions. If a doctor makes a mistake (the fact that they are human is irrelavent) that is why they have malpractice insurance. For when they make mistakes. Are any of you suggesting that only the people who are hurt should be reponsible for themselves. Don’t the doctors have a responsibilty for their actions.
Clearly not info on this case presented one way or another. But the doc’s, attorneys and individuals all have responsibilities. If a doc screws up they should be held responsible. In several states, unless you go to court, doc’s malpractice is not a public record so people may not ever know “internal reputation” of doctor until its too late. Maybe some of those rules should be changed.
I know too many doc’s who won’t go to a particular surgeon because of mistakes, but they won’t clean up their own industry.
Fred: your understanding of malpractice insurance isn’t quite on point. The general public and money grubbing attorneys have decided to try and hold the medical profession to a higher standard than anyone else on the planet. Suggest you read the legal definition of “malpractice” listed below.
1. Law. failure of a professional person, as a physician or lawyer, to render proper services through reprehensible ignorance or negligence or through criminal intent, esp. when injury or loss follows.
2. any improper, negligent practice; misconduct or misuse.
If and when you need medical treatment, you seek out the most educated, competent individual you can find to help you. As some people have aptly noted, you seek help from another HUMAN BEING. Bad outcomes don’t = malpractice. Doctors are getting fed up with people attacking them for trying to do their best. Concurrently, the HMO’s and other healthcare organizations have cut into physician earnings. Doctors are disciplined professionals who have invested in their education and deserve both respect and compensation. They’re not punching bags for emotional and irrational families. It would serve some people right to have doctors leave their cities and let them to find some “perfect” solution to all their medical problems.
I’m not saying that there aren’t some bad doctors out there. Although I don’t think there are many. I believe by and large that most doctors are competent professionals who strive to do their best. When you do have a bad doctor that is grossly neglignet (perhaps operates under the influence of alcohol etc…) then that Doctor is prosecuted through the legal system, does time in jail and probably loses his medical license. However, you don’t sue him, thus causing medical costs to continue to go up.
Here is another point to ponder. Why are damages payable if the delay was pre-birth when the child was not a child but only something that could legally be aborted? If there was lack of proper care after birth, then fine, but until abortion is outlawed why should a doctor pay for damages that occur before the delivery?
Au contraire, abortion is legal in all 50 states for the entire duration of pregnancy by judicial fiat, despite the 10th Amendment. Thank the Supreme Court for that “emanation of a penumbra.”
As the article states, “It was a six- to eight-hour delay in performing a C-section in a baby that was showing signs of fetal distress on a fetal monitor”. I read this to mean that they tried to deliver the baby vaginally for a few hours but couldn’t, then did a c-section. I could be totally wrong on that. But Pat, are you saying it’s ok to abort a child during birth if it isn’t going as planned??? I’m pro-choice but that is a pretty harsh statement. And your referring to the child as “something that can be aborted” is… I’m speachless. You have a right to voice your opinion, but WOW, I’m really surprised that no one has hammered you on that one.
I’d like to know if it was proven that the child’s disabilities were actually caused by the delay or if they existed in-utero? The article states that the mother had risk factors and that she had problems prior to arriving at the hospital for delivery.
Can Cerebral Palsy be caused by delay or truama in-utero?
John Edwards specialized in babies with cerebral palsy whom he claimed would have been spared the affliction if only the doctors had immediately performed Caesarean sections. He actually channeled these babies’ voices for juries, and won millions of himself (oh yeah, and his clients) doing so (NY Times January 31, 2004).
So the trial lawyers in this case are disciples of John Edwards. See, you only =thought= you knew why these lawyers disgusted you.
Actually, I am strongly pro-life and support a variety of organizations that are trying to outlaw abortion. My post was intended to make a point that if this child can legally be aborted, doctors should not be liable for pre-birth injuries to them. Not something the pro-choice movement has addressed.
Exactly, Pat. The pro-abortion crowd’s spin is that if the mother wants it, it’s a baby, if she doesn’t (until the very moment of birth), it’s merely the parasitic products of conception to be disposed of for any -or no- reason. This is known as being “pro-choice,” and it is the official position of the democrat party.
The best thing they can do is to promote judges who have actually seen a copy of the Constitution, as all have promised to do.
In fact, if we had a consevative majority in the house and senate they could simply remove abortion (or anything else) from the jurisdiction of the federal courts. Then it would automatically devolve to the states (where it belongs anyway) and we could go back to the constitutional republic we should be, rather than the judicial oligarchy we have become.
Your right lastbat. It is very trajic and painful for the family.
It just dosen’t seem right to have a financial windfall over this. The award is much higher than what is needed to care for this persons medical needs. The award should never be more than what is truely needed to take care of the individual that is hurt.
The verdict goes more than just the care for the child. The money also goes for the reduced quality of life the child has also endured. Now the child can’t run and play football, baseball, play in the sand with his friends, hide and go seek among other things. I for one would not give up my life to sit in a wheelchair for $26.5 million dollars. Would you?
I am very sympathetic to the family and to the child. But at what point do we say that the verdict is a windfall and not just punitive.
It seems to me it just gives people an incentive to sue for everything. If a family can get more money than they could ever use in a life time, how does that make the situation right either?
I understand your point about the money but actually it about the quality of life. Don’t get me wrong about the jury verdict. I spent 15 years handling injury claims and for the most part they are bogus. But there are a few that you have a hard time putting a dollar value on. Here is my question to you. At what dollar value would you sell your quality of life (your position for his). Now bear in mind, he did not have a choice in the matter and you do. I would not want to sit on this jury and try to come up with a reasonable figure.
Actually sick neo-kkkons like you have turned this once great country (and the once great republican party) into a theocracy. You may be “pro-life” but you are anti-American, please leave.
typical conservative doublespeak. On abortion, it is send it back to the states. On gay marriage it is we need a constitutional amendment. Shows what hypocrites they truly are
We need such a constitutional amendment due to the “full faith and gredit clause” of a document you have never read, called the Constitution. Federal judges appointed by Clinton and Carter will eventually rule that sodomists who “marry” in MASS must have their “marriages” recognized in normal states because of this clause. So yes, we need to amend the Constitution to protect normal people and children from sodomists and their enablers.
Thank you for agreeing. There are some people who acting like this family has taken advantage of the system. All they did was ask the system to assign fault and then render a money amount. The fault part was likely easy. The money would not have been. I know most jurors probably reflected back on their own lives and tried to come up with things this kid would not be able to enjoy. What’s sad is, if you asked each one to come up with a figure and then ask them to change spots they wouldn’t. Hard task but to ask the jurors and again one I would not want to be a part of. Like they always have said in claims, it is much cheaper to kill someone than it is to cause catastrophic injury.
I don’t know any of you, but if you’re for the killing of unborn children and for homosexual marriages, then there are at least 2 things we don’t agree upon. If not agreeing with your secular progressive agenda makes me a hypocrite, then I guess I’m a hypocrite.
Ah yes, Sheila Jackson Lee:
In 2003, Lee complained that the names of hurricanes were too “lily white” (how can a name be white? Is Lee stereotyping? Surely not…), and demanded that more ‘black’ names be used.
On a visit to the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Lee, a member of the House Science Committee’s space subcommittee, asked if the Mars Pathfinder had taken an image of the flag Neil Armstrong planted there in 1969.
As the Lord said, “Those who hate me love death.” It has nothing to do with “theocracy,” though. One needn’t be a theocrat to want to prevent innocent babies from being drawn and quartered in utero.
I don’t spend much time on this site but when I do, I usually try to add my two cents. I typically read all the entries before commenting. It’s funny how the first 10-15 logs are actually about the facts of the article but then the others take over and all so often the topic at the end is “insults” and “politics”.
Thanks for the comments and enjoyed sticking to the facts of the article.
There was a comment a few back that asked if I would trade my life for one in a wheelchair for $26M. I would have to ask – what’s the rest? Am I just wheelchair bound or do I drool and wet myself?
In all seriousness, I wouldn’t. I think the figure was pulled out of thin air as a symphathy number, but I don’t envy the jury having to figure it out.
On the doctor’s side, sometimes things happen. And just because the baby has problems does not make it malpractice. There does need to be a better system of reviewing these things. I just don’t know what it is.
Willy, what’s wrong with sodomy? I know it’s still illegal in most jurisdictions, but what is really wrong with it? I think most people enjoy a little bit of sodomy every now and then. In fact, from what I read, many women can not have an orgasm without it.
Your condition would be the same as those stated in the article. But based on your answer, that would be no. We need to compare apples to apples to have an intelligent debate over what is right.
In regards to your last paragraph:
On the doctor’s side, sometimes things happen. And just because the baby has problems does not make it malpractice. There does need to be a better system of reviewing these things. I just don’t know what it is.
I really don’t know if there is a fix to our system. As long as you have plantiff “*****” doctors and defense “*****” doctors the jury will never know. They must form their own opinion mostly on stuff that is so far over their head they lean towards the one they like the most. Unfortunately this may be appearance or how they carry themselves or they may dislike the opposing attorneys tactics at trial. Unfortunately these types of items have real world implication in our judicial system and the truth gets lost.
My personal opinion is this. The doctors were already pushing the truck up hill based on their actions or lack thereof. Not sure if the cerebal pulsey is related but if it could be, then shame on the insurance companies for not settling. If his condition is directly related to what happened at birth, the jurors failed at their task because the monetary amount does not justify the rights and priveledges that have been taken away from this innocent boy.
Now see Abu, that’s just the kind of statement that gets people turned against you. I’m not religious so don’t care who it comes from; if you tell me your Holy Being, or their designate, is going to strike me down for something it just puts me off.
You’d think with the charged atmosphere we already have in America people would have learned to tone down the “God will kill you for your sins” talk. It’s bad enough I have to put up with it from the Christ followers; I really hate having others gang up.
I find that I agree with a lotof your positions when it comes to insurance, jury awards etc…, however when it comes to your social positions like religion and homosexuality, we diverge drastically. I am religious (Christian) and I don’t believe that my God (Christ) will strike you down during this life, for your beliefs or actions. That kind of belief comes from the Muslim religion. As far as your comments about sodomy, I have no problem with it between consenting husbands and wives. I do have a problem with it between two males.
What I don’t understand, Shield, is the difference between the two. I’m a heterosexual male who has experienced no homosexual acts nor had any homosexual urgings, and I like heterosexual sodomy as much as the next person; but I don’t get the cafeteria religion thing. The Abrahamic faiths all say that sodomy is bad – so what’s the difference? The Bible doesn’t say homosexual sodomy is bad but heterosexual sodomy is good, it just says sodomy is bad. The Bible also says hypocrisy is bad.
There was a book released recently, I wish I could remember the title, documenting the life of a man who spent a year following every rule in the Bible. Both testaments. This meant he wore no blended fabrics, only wore white, attempted to stone an adulterer, ate no shrimp, prayed when he was supposed to, the whole nine yards. He found it a very enlightening experience and impossible to sustain in modern times. There were rules he could not follow. Either there were legal barriers (such as stoning the adulterer) or other things in the way. He had to take it cafeteria-style. His wife hated the project. Now if people don’t follow parts of their religion because it’s impossible to I can understand that – no stoning. But just because you feel it’s okay makes it pointless to express those opinions as a religious belief. It cheapens the religion. Were it a religious belief it would cross all barriers.
And just because you don’t say God will strike me down does not mean all Christ-followers are of the same mentality. Not all Muslims say Allah or Mohammed will wreak nasty vengeance either. Christ-followers (I use that term because it includes Catholics, Protestents and all others) are just as guilty as Muslims when it comes to spewing the “God will smite thee” talk. In general. As a group. There are exceptions.
I don’t do this to bait people; when it comes to religion I honestly seek a deeper understanding of what drives people to an organization, a faith, a system, that promotes and demands hypocrisy. My own beliefs are in tune with my opinions. I seek to understand.
You and the author of the book don’t have a true understanding of being a follower of Christ. We believe the principles of the Bible but do not follow the Old Testament Laws of the Bible. Christ taught that he came to abolish the law. That’s why the church crucified Him. Christ taught that your good works (law following) are worthless and that the only way to God is through the washing of your sins through his death, burial, and resurrection. You don’t have to believe that but at the same time you should be careful of attacking someone’s beliefs and calling them cafeteria-style when you really don’t know what you are talking about.
Concerning hypocrites, there are a lot of hypocrites at football games. People who come who really aren’t as fanatical about the team as I am. We call them fair weathered fans. But I don’t let them change my view of the game or the team. I can’t control them so I don’t hide behind them. I still love my football team. Calling people hypocrites is a cop out unless you are perfect yourself.
Okay, BTS, so the only rules you have to follow are those in the New Testament? It doesn’t matter what you do as long as you believe Christ is your Lord and Savior? I am not trying to bait you here, I am honestly seeking an understanding. Because if Christ-followers don’t have to follow the laws of the old testament where does the hue and cry about sodomy, homosexuality, audultery – or really anything else come from. More specifically, how can it be framed as a religious belief if the only “true” religious belief of Christ-followers is that they are saved in Christ? If nothing you do matters why gripe about what other people do? Do the ten commandments no longer count? Can you blaspheme and still go to heaven, as long as you believe Christ loves you? Can you rape, pillage and murder but still go to heaven as long as you believe Christ died for your sins? Do you see where I get the cafeteria-style thinking? You cannot hold something as a religious belief if it is not. If the old testament has nothing to do with modern Christ-worship leave its laws out of the debate and be honest – these are personal preferences.
I am far from perfect, but it doesn’t take a perfect person to call a spade a spade and a hypocrite a hypocrite. It is hypocrisy to say that something is bad then engage in it yourself; or condone it under “certain circumstances”. That doesn’t take perfection; it takes eyes.
You pose some very good questions. There’s a difference between atonement and living right. In Old Testament times believers of God had to live right and make sacrifices in the temple in order to be atoned for their sin. Because of the sacrifice of Christ on the cross and his resurrection we are now made right before God. I encourage you to read Romans 5-6. Paul taught that where sin abounds grace abounds even more. Not that we have a license to sin, but that we don’t have to work for our salvation. The sad thing is that most Christians prefer to have their own list of sins that are worse than the others. In God’s eyes a sin is a sin. Jesus taught that the law says not to murder but you have already committed murder if in your own heart if you have hatred toward someone. The point is that without the sacrifice of Christ, the smallest sin separates us from God. The truth is that we are all hypocrites one way or the other. I just don’t believe that I have the right to tell someone they are worse off than me. I think God is big enough to handle them on His own. He doesn’t need my help. He got through to me without anybody’s help.
Might want to review the case law in this state regarding this matter. Once a pregnancy reaches a certain time frame (weeks) they are considered to be individuals. I believe this time frame may be around 30-32 weeks. Usually they use the standard if the baby could be removed from the mother and reasonably sustain life (with help of medicine) they are considered to be individuals.
I handled auto claims for 15 years and this was the threshold we had to use in handling injury claims. I have been out of the business for about 5 years so the exact time frame is unclear. Also, due to the time of the pregnancy, ABORTION is not an option. Most states would consider this murder.
Almost makes me wish I were a doctor so I could review the facts with some hope of coming to a reasonable conclusion. The initial reading for me sounds like sympathetic jury and someone just won the litigation lottery. Tragic stuff though.
I wonder why there was 6 to 8 hours of delay when the baby was in distress. Also, it sounds as though the baby was delivered vaginally (forceps)in stead of C-Section. I don’t think we have been given the entire story here.
You never are given the whole story. Any mistakes doctors make are kept secret, and the patients aren’t told. Doctors are great at surgery but they don’t know much about how to deliver a baby. In fact most of the time a doctor does something during delivery it makes things worse, such as breaking the water, giving drugs to speed up the delivery and needless cesareans (25% of all births are cesarean now). Women who get induced are commonly scheduled to be induced at midnight for no other reason than to allow the doctor to come in at 8am in the next morning to deliver the baby. We give doctors too much authority and they are rarely if ever questioned. Whenever you have someone who has ‘unquestioned’ authority they will invariably abuse that authority. Just like you should question what professor tells you in college, question what the media prints, and question on occasion the conduct of the police, you should also question what your doctors says and verify based on your own research.
I say let’s see how many “defects” deformaties and deaths occur during deliver without the presence of a Doctor… Yes there are risks with any pregancy, yes there are “errors” in judgement (basically, isn’t that what makes us human?) and yes there are going to be serious consequences. I’m tired of everyone blaming the doctors for the outcome of much of these posts – Let’s have all of the OBGyn’s quit doing deliveries and see what happens then.
I had a very risky delivery – after 8 hours and because my DR didn’t believe in forecepts, went the C-Section route – with a paralizing epidural, nicked spinal column and complications – but I never once thought of a lawsuit…
Where we would we be without Dr’s ? They’re not perfect – I’d like to see anyone say they were –
If I had my choice between a DR and a LAWYER – there’s no question who I would choose – The men and women who dedicate themselves to do what they can to make things right and attempt to keep us ticking know that every waking hour they are assuming “risk” – We should do the same – Life is a risk..
Great post, eb
I just had a relative give birth and they induced her to the point that she gave birth HOURS earlier than anyone expected. She was in labor ONLY three and half hours and expected to go 18. Just twenty minutes more and my aunt would have been delivering the baby. Thank God her doctor hadn’t gone to lunch like she had planned. My cousin was centimeter dilated and an hour and a half later, fully dilated. Yes, question EVERYTHING. It’s the closest a woman comes to death without dying and you had better check every angle.
I feel so sorry for this family. It will take a few million just for the care alone. “Healthy” babies already can put a strain on budgets and this family did not deserve this. On the other hand I feel sorry for OBGYNS. They have alot on them but then too more needs to be done to make sure that nothing goes wrong. Just because every delivery is supposedly different does not mean that you make a God-complex call.
Agree with wa. Coupled with the comments this woman had some issues prior to the delivery, lastbat may be on point with a sympathy verdict. Faced with lifetime care for tragic cases…..the issue always becomes “who is going to pay”. The sad part is what quality of life is all this money going to buy? Doesn’t sound like much but our society isn’t ready to face any alternatives. Considering skyrocketing costs, I believe there will come a time when hard decisions will have to made about how much care will be allocated to persons with no hope for any quality of life. That’s frightening.
We always hear about the “bad” stories of doctors and surgeries gone wrong, and many people are quick to jump on the “doctors have a god complex” bandwagon. But for every “bad” story, there are thousands of “happy ending” stories that you never hear about. Think about that the next time you want to bash doctors. Chances are, you know of someone who is alive today due to the miraculous work of a doctor.
Yeah, I know more than my doctors. I always tell them they’re full of bs whenever they tell me what to do or not to do.
Was that sarcasm? I’m having a hard time figuring that out. But if not, then why do you see your doctor?
Why do I bother to see my doctor? Just in case I ever get the chance to sue him.
We have got to get to a point in our American Society that we learn to take responsibility for our own lives. Life isn’t fair and there are going to be bad things that happen to us that quite possibly could have been caused by someone else’s negligence, or perhaps they weren’t negligent, but your have the better lawyer and he convinces a jury that they were negligent. Just because bad things happen to us, that doesn’t give us the “right to sue”. Uh oh, my kids was out in the street and was hit by a car and I probably just won the lotery, read that as the chance to sue and get rich. Doctors are goingto make mistakes now and then. We are human and humans make mistakes. Rising healthcare costs and insurance premiums are affected by our society’s refusal to understand that sopmetimes bad things are going to happen and we need to understand that and get on with life, instead of trying to find someone to blame.
I agree with Joey – it’s just the way it is…we never get to hear about the good things that the medical professionals get done. These days, we just like to focus on all the bad.
Being that the mother had some pre-existing issues that were complicating her pregnancy, unless we know the entire medical history, we really shouldn’t be commenting on how the doctor’s performed.
Willy,
That was funny! Thanks for the laugh! However, what’s even funnier / scarier is that some people REALLY think this way. Don’t question doctors as to why surgery and treatment cost so much. Question the insurance companies that charge ridiculous premiums for malpractice insurance, which is in response to the ridiculous lawsuits filed against doctors. See how it’s cyclical???
It makes my head ssssspinnnnn…
This is a ton of $$, but wait for the appelate verdict to see what the final outcome will be. Hope we find out what that one is.
I am confused by some of the comments.
First there are great doctors and what may surprise you all, there are great lawyers, just maybe not as many.
People should be reponsible for their actions. If a doctor makes a mistake (the fact that they are human is irrelavent) that is why they have malpractice insurance. For when they make mistakes. Are any of you suggesting that only the people who are hurt should be reponsible for themselves. Don’t the doctors have a responsibilty for their actions.
Clearly not info on this case presented one way or another. But the doc’s, attorneys and individuals all have responsibilities. If a doc screws up they should be held responsible. In several states, unless you go to court, doc’s malpractice is not a public record so people may not ever know “internal reputation” of doctor until its too late. Maybe some of those rules should be changed.
I know too many doc’s who won’t go to a particular surgeon because of mistakes, but they won’t clean up their own industry.
Fred: your understanding of malpractice insurance isn’t quite on point. The general public and money grubbing attorneys have decided to try and hold the medical profession to a higher standard than anyone else on the planet. Suggest you read the legal definition of “malpractice” listed below.
1. Law. failure of a professional person, as a physician or lawyer, to render proper services through reprehensible ignorance or negligence or through criminal intent, esp. when injury or loss follows.
2. any improper, negligent practice; misconduct or misuse.
If and when you need medical treatment, you seek out the most educated, competent individual you can find to help you. As some people have aptly noted, you seek help from another HUMAN BEING. Bad outcomes don’t = malpractice. Doctors are getting fed up with people attacking them for trying to do their best. Concurrently, the HMO’s and other healthcare organizations have cut into physician earnings. Doctors are disciplined professionals who have invested in their education and deserve both respect and compensation. They’re not punching bags for emotional and irrational families. It would serve some people right to have doctors leave their cities and let them to find some “perfect” solution to all their medical problems.
Agreed lastbat. I hope this junk verdict is appealed.
I’m not saying that there aren’t some bad doctors out there. Although I don’t think there are many. I believe by and large that most doctors are competent professionals who strive to do their best. When you do have a bad doctor that is grossly neglignet (perhaps operates under the influence of alcohol etc…) then that Doctor is prosecuted through the legal system, does time in jail and probably loses his medical license. However, you don’t sue him, thus causing medical costs to continue to go up.
Here is another point to ponder. Why are damages payable if the delay was pre-birth when the child was not a child but only something that could legally be aborted? If there was lack of proper care after birth, then fine, but until abortion is outlawed why should a doctor pay for damages that occur before the delivery?
Au contraire, abortion is legal in all 50 states for the entire duration of pregnancy by judicial fiat, despite the 10th Amendment. Thank the Supreme Court for that “emanation of a penumbra.”
As the article states, “It was a six- to eight-hour delay in performing a C-section in a baby that was showing signs of fetal distress on a fetal monitor”. I read this to mean that they tried to deliver the baby vaginally for a few hours but couldn’t, then did a c-section. I could be totally wrong on that. But Pat, are you saying it’s ok to abort a child during birth if it isn’t going as planned??? I’m pro-choice but that is a pretty harsh statement. And your referring to the child as “something that can be aborted” is… I’m speachless. You have a right to voice your opinion, but WOW, I’m really surprised that no one has hammered you on that one.
Just out of curiosity, do you have children?
Hank, she was being sarcastic, I think. The fact is that a mother in labor may legally decide to abort and no one can stop her.
These parents should be thankful for having a living child. Greed, and not just that of the lawyers, drives things like this.
I’d like to know if it was proven that the child’s disabilities were actually caused by the delay or if they existed in-utero? The article states that the mother had risk factors and that she had problems prior to arriving at the hospital for delivery.
Can Cerebral Palsy be caused by delay or truama in-utero?
They probably don’t know for sure. It will boil down to who has the most credible expert witnesses.
John Edwards specialized in babies with cerebral palsy whom he claimed would have been spared the affliction if only the doctors had immediately performed Caesarean sections. He actually channeled these babies’ voices for juries, and won millions of himself (oh yeah, and his clients) doing so (NY Times January 31, 2004).
So the trial lawyers in this case are disciples of John Edwards. See, you only =thought= you knew why these lawyers disgusted you.
Actually, I am strongly pro-life and support a variety of organizations that are trying to outlaw abortion. My post was intended to make a point that if this child can legally be aborted, doctors should not be liable for pre-birth injuries to them. Not something the pro-choice movement has addressed.
Exactly, Pat. The pro-abortion crowd’s spin is that if the mother wants it, it’s a baby, if she doesn’t (until the very moment of birth), it’s merely the parasitic products of conception to be disposed of for any -or no- reason. This is known as being “pro-choice,” and it is the official position of the democrat party.
Unfortunately, most of the options that republicans are getting at the moment in the primary aren’t very strongly prolife either.
The best thing they can do is to promote judges who have actually seen a copy of the Constitution, as all have promised to do.
In fact, if we had a consevative majority in the house and senate they could simply remove abortion (or anything else) from the jurisdiction of the federal courts. Then it would automatically devolve to the states (where it belongs anyway) and we could go back to the constitutional republic we should be, rather than the judicial oligarchy we have become.
Your right lastbat. It is very trajic and painful for the family.
It just dosen’t seem right to have a financial windfall over this. The award is much higher than what is needed to care for this persons medical needs. The award should never be more than what is truely needed to take care of the individual that is hurt.
The verdict goes more than just the care for the child. The money also goes for the reduced quality of life the child has also endured. Now the child can’t run and play football, baseball, play in the sand with his friends, hide and go seek among other things. I for one would not give up my life to sit in a wheelchair for $26.5 million dollars. Would you?
No I wouldn’t. Nor should a court come up with that kind of damage award.
I am very sympathetic to the family and to the child. But at what point do we say that the verdict is a windfall and not just punitive.
It seems to me it just gives people an incentive to sue for everything. If a family can get more money than they could ever use in a life time, how does that make the situation right either?
I understand your point about the money but actually it about the quality of life. Don’t get me wrong about the jury verdict. I spent 15 years handling injury claims and for the most part they are bogus. But there are a few that you have a hard time putting a dollar value on. Here is my question to you. At what dollar value would you sell your quality of life (your position for his). Now bear in mind, he did not have a choice in the matter and you do. I would not want to sit on this jury and try to come up with a reasonable figure.
Actually sick neo-kkkons like you have turned this once great country (and the once great republican party) into a theocracy. You may be “pro-life” but you are anti-American, please leave.
typical conservative doublespeak. On abortion, it is send it back to the states. On gay marriage it is we need a constitutional amendment. Shows what hypocrites they truly are
Who are you directing your remarks towards?
David,
Point well taken. I don’t know how anyone could place a dollar figure on a life.
And, honestly, I don’t think I want any person or group to be in a position to place a concrete dollar figure on another persons life.
The Republican Party has always been prolife. I didn’t change it, I joined it.
Oh, and it was Robert Byrd (D-WVA) that was Grand Cyclops of the KKK. No Republicans that I know of were.
Name calling helps you win arguments and gain the respect of others, so always be sure to call people names when you disagree with them.
We need such a constitutional amendment due to the “full faith and gredit clause” of a document you have never read, called the Constitution. Federal judges appointed by Clinton and Carter will eventually rule that sodomists who “marry” in MASS must have their “marriages” recognized in normal states because of this clause. So yes, we need to amend the Constitution to protect normal people and children from sodomists and their enablers.
Thanks
SP,
Thank you for agreeing. There are some people who acting like this family has taken advantage of the system. All they did was ask the system to assign fault and then render a money amount. The fault part was likely easy. The money would not have been. I know most jurors probably reflected back on their own lives and tried to come up with things this kid would not be able to enjoy. What’s sad is, if you asked each one to come up with a figure and then ask them to change spots they wouldn’t. Hard task but to ask the jurors and again one I would not want to be a part of. Like they always have said in claims, it is much cheaper to kill someone than it is to cause catastrophic injury.
Rosie, Mary B. and Sheila Jackson Lee,
I don’t know any of you, but if you’re for the killing of unborn children and for homosexual marriages, then there are at least 2 things we don’t agree upon. If not agreeing with your secular progressive agenda makes me a hypocrite, then I guess I’m a hypocrite.
Ah yes, Sheila Jackson Lee:
In 2003, Lee complained that the names of hurricanes were too “lily white” (how can a name be white? Is Lee stereotyping? Surely not…), and demanded that more ‘black’ names be used.
On a visit to the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Lee, a member of the House Science Committee’s space subcommittee, asked if the Mars Pathfinder had taken an image of the flag Neil Armstrong planted there in 1969.
Are you as smart as she is?
So very true about the claim comment. It’s cheaper for the victim to die.
Also, I want to thank you for a very well thought out discussion. Unfortunately, many of the online discussions turn to name calling and insults.
Thank you.
As the Lord said, “Those who hate me love death.” It has nothing to do with “theocracy,” though. One needn’t be a theocrat to want to prevent innocent babies from being drawn and quartered in utero.
I don’t spend much time on this site but when I do, I usually try to add my two cents. I typically read all the entries before commenting. It’s funny how the first 10-15 logs are actually about the facts of the article but then the others take over and all so often the topic at the end is “insults” and “politics”.
Thanks for the comments and enjoyed sticking to the facts of the article.
There was a comment a few back that asked if I would trade my life for one in a wheelchair for $26M. I would have to ask – what’s the rest? Am I just wheelchair bound or do I drool and wet myself?
In all seriousness, I wouldn’t. I think the figure was pulled out of thin air as a symphathy number, but I don’t envy the jury having to figure it out.
On the doctor’s side, sometimes things happen. And just because the baby has problems does not make it malpractice. There does need to be a better system of reviewing these things. I just don’t know what it is.
Willy, what’s wrong with sodomy? I know it’s still illegal in most jurisdictions, but what is really wrong with it? I think most people enjoy a little bit of sodomy every now and then. In fact, from what I read, many women can not have an orgasm without it.
Your condition would be the same as those stated in the article. But based on your answer, that would be no. We need to compare apples to apples to have an intelligent debate over what is right.
In regards to your last paragraph:
On the doctor’s side, sometimes things happen. And just because the baby has problems does not make it malpractice. There does need to be a better system of reviewing these things. I just don’t know what it is.
I really don’t know if there is a fix to our system. As long as you have plantiff “*****” doctors and defense “*****” doctors the jury will never know. They must form their own opinion mostly on stuff that is so far over their head they lean towards the one they like the most. Unfortunately this may be appearance or how they carry themselves or they may dislike the opposing attorneys tactics at trial. Unfortunately these types of items have real world implication in our judicial system and the truth gets lost.
My personal opinion is this. The doctors were already pushing the truck up hill based on their actions or lack thereof. Not sure if the cerebal pulsey is related but if it could be, then shame on the insurance companies for not settling. If his condition is directly related to what happened at birth, the jurors failed at their task because the monetary amount does not justify the rights and priveledges that have been taken away from this innocent boy.
My wife Fatima and I agree. The wrath of Mohammed will strike down the heathen with fury. Allah Akbar
Now see Abu, that’s just the kind of statement that gets people turned against you. I’m not religious so don’t care who it comes from; if you tell me your Holy Being, or their designate, is going to strike me down for something it just puts me off.
You’d think with the charged atmosphere we already have in America people would have learned to tone down the “God will kill you for your sins” talk. It’s bad enough I have to put up with it from the Christ followers; I really hate having others gang up.
lastbat,
I find that I agree with a lotof your positions when it comes to insurance, jury awards etc…, however when it comes to your social positions like religion and homosexuality, we diverge drastically. I am religious (Christian) and I don’t believe that my God (Christ) will strike you down during this life, for your beliefs or actions. That kind of belief comes from the Muslim religion. As far as your comments about sodomy, I have no problem with it between consenting husbands and wives. I do have a problem with it between two males.
Well you are a hypocrite and a bigot and that’s fine but keep it to yourself as I don’t like your discriminatory and hate mongering religious agenda.
What I don’t understand, Shield, is the difference between the two. I’m a heterosexual male who has experienced no homosexual acts nor had any homosexual urgings, and I like heterosexual sodomy as much as the next person; but I don’t get the cafeteria religion thing. The Abrahamic faiths all say that sodomy is bad – so what’s the difference? The Bible doesn’t say homosexual sodomy is bad but heterosexual sodomy is good, it just says sodomy is bad. The Bible also says hypocrisy is bad.
There was a book released recently, I wish I could remember the title, documenting the life of a man who spent a year following every rule in the Bible. Both testaments. This meant he wore no blended fabrics, only wore white, attempted to stone an adulterer, ate no shrimp, prayed when he was supposed to, the whole nine yards. He found it a very enlightening experience and impossible to sustain in modern times. There were rules he could not follow. Either there were legal barriers (such as stoning the adulterer) or other things in the way. He had to take it cafeteria-style. His wife hated the project. Now if people don’t follow parts of their religion because it’s impossible to I can understand that – no stoning. But just because you feel it’s okay makes it pointless to express those opinions as a religious belief. It cheapens the religion. Were it a religious belief it would cross all barriers.
And just because you don’t say God will strike me down does not mean all Christ-followers are of the same mentality. Not all Muslims say Allah or Mohammed will wreak nasty vengeance either. Christ-followers (I use that term because it includes Catholics, Protestents and all others) are just as guilty as Muslims when it comes to spewing the “God will smite thee” talk. In general. As a group. There are exceptions.
I don’t do this to bait people; when it comes to religion I honestly seek a deeper understanding of what drives people to an organization, a faith, a system, that promotes and demands hypocrisy. My own beliefs are in tune with my opinions. I seek to understand.
The book is “The Year of Living Biblically” by A. J. Jacobs. You can read the Newsweek Interview with the author at http://www.newsweek.com/id/41178.
Haven’t gone through all the commens yet so someone may have beat me to this, but, sure sounds like an Edwards case to me!
lastbat,
You and the author of the book don’t have a true understanding of being a follower of Christ. We believe the principles of the Bible but do not follow the Old Testament Laws of the Bible. Christ taught that he came to abolish the law. That’s why the church crucified Him. Christ taught that your good works (law following) are worthless and that the only way to God is through the washing of your sins through his death, burial, and resurrection. You don’t have to believe that but at the same time you should be careful of attacking someone’s beliefs and calling them cafeteria-style when you really don’t know what you are talking about.
Concerning hypocrites, there are a lot of hypocrites at football games. People who come who really aren’t as fanatical about the team as I am. We call them fair weathered fans. But I don’t let them change my view of the game or the team. I can’t control them so I don’t hide behind them. I still love my football team. Calling people hypocrites is a cop out unless you are perfect yourself.
Okay, BTS, so the only rules you have to follow are those in the New Testament? It doesn’t matter what you do as long as you believe Christ is your Lord and Savior? I am not trying to bait you here, I am honestly seeking an understanding. Because if Christ-followers don’t have to follow the laws of the old testament where does the hue and cry about sodomy, homosexuality, audultery – or really anything else come from. More specifically, how can it be framed as a religious belief if the only “true” religious belief of Christ-followers is that they are saved in Christ? If nothing you do matters why gripe about what other people do? Do the ten commandments no longer count? Can you blaspheme and still go to heaven, as long as you believe Christ loves you? Can you rape, pillage and murder but still go to heaven as long as you believe Christ died for your sins? Do you see where I get the cafeteria-style thinking? You cannot hold something as a religious belief if it is not. If the old testament has nothing to do with modern Christ-worship leave its laws out of the debate and be honest – these are personal preferences.
I am far from perfect, but it doesn’t take a perfect person to call a spade a spade and a hypocrite a hypocrite. It is hypocrisy to say that something is bad then engage in it yourself; or condone it under “certain circumstances”. That doesn’t take perfection; it takes eyes.
lastbat,
You pose some very good questions. There’s a difference between atonement and living right. In Old Testament times believers of God had to live right and make sacrifices in the temple in order to be atoned for their sin. Because of the sacrifice of Christ on the cross and his resurrection we are now made right before God. I encourage you to read Romans 5-6. Paul taught that where sin abounds grace abounds even more. Not that we have a license to sin, but that we don’t have to work for our salvation. The sad thing is that most Christians prefer to have their own list of sins that are worse than the others. In God’s eyes a sin is a sin. Jesus taught that the law says not to murder but you have already committed murder if in your own heart if you have hatred toward someone. The point is that without the sacrifice of Christ, the smallest sin separates us from God. The truth is that we are all hypocrites one way or the other. I just don’t believe that I have the right to tell someone they are worse off than me. I think God is big enough to handle them on His own. He doesn’t need my help. He got through to me without anybody’s help.
BTS,
I appreciate your reply. It gives me things to think upon and may allow for a better understanding of Christ-followers.