Category: Let's talk
A hospital in the UK is taking legal action against a firm of injury lawyers (more commonly known as ambulance chasers), for harrassing patients in its emergency department. Apparently representatives from the firm put up posters, handed out leaflets, and questioned patients as they waited to be seen, as to the nature of their ailments, and whether someone was to blame, and if so, whether they would b interested in pursuing a claim for compensation.
So why is it, that in society today, people have this feeling that someone else has to be accountable? Why is it, that people no longer have accidents? Why is it, that someone else should have to pay the price for something which, after all, probably really was just an accident.
Of course I understand that some things are just down to negligence, and that someone should be held accountable, but you see these companies on tv, advertising, and they have these people on there ... "i slipped on a wet floor and received x thousand pounds!" well that's nice, but .. we're all human?
very good point sugar baby, there are accidents. I think the lawyers who do that are terrible. Good for the hosipatial for doing that.
Because Compensation hasn't yet been outlawed, but the sooner it is, the better!
the sooner the better.
well I believe that there are instances where someone has to be held accountable, and yes sometimes I believe there are times when compensation is appropriate. I have a cousin who was very badly scalded by a cup of coffee when he was a baby. he went to hospital, and the hospital applied a spray, a skin covering spray to help the burn wounds heal. However, the way in which the spray was used resulted in my cousin becoming partially deaf. This had happened to several children over a period of time, and the parents took the maker of the spray to court. the company settled, and my cousin received an amount in compensation. It will never bring his hearing back, but it enabled his parents to buy the best technology for him, hearing aids etc, and he therefore lived a normal life because of it. However, things like burning yourself on a hot cup of coffee in mconalds, slipping on a wet floor, falling off a climbing frame, those are accidents, and should be treated as such
Well the costs of repairing the damage should be paid, but noone should recceive any other kind of money for damage.
Oh I absolutely agree, no one should ever profit from such an incident. after all, you hear of cases where a child say has died in a hospital, and again, perhaps a lawsuit is the only way in which someone will be brought to account, but money? no amount of money will bring that child back, you can't compensate for the death of a child.
Wangel you are without doubt a COMPLETE eejit ...Would you include those children left catastrophically brain damaged at birth, by negligent doctors ect, or those who become paraplegic ect in horrific road accidents,I assume you have little or NO idea, of the cost of living for physically disabled people its 3 times what we pay out to live independently..in future please think before opening your ignorant mouth.....
ah but if memory serves, then our friend the waynderful wangel would deem those children left cronically brain damaged unfit to make a contribution to society and would recommend that they be euthanised in order that society did not have to carry the burden of their care. Of course I could be wrong and imagine that he will offer his opinion on this fact ..
Yes he would probably have them lined up to be shot with some distinguishing symbol on their bony chests, so the perfect members of society can recognise them and the marksmen also know where to aim for..
............
As for the compensation for losing a child although I agree its a tragic loss, the money may allow the family to sue the hospital therefore giving them some sense of justice..
Well <grin> not commenting on the WW fact but in terms of compensation, well, we need to consider bigger implications in fact.
E.g. if you are hit by a drunk driver and break your arm perminantly, should the compensation only cover the operations to restore your arm to a painless state. Shouldn't they take into account how that affects your life. I guess arm isn't a good example, e.g. I know of a person who was hit and now has serious back problems so she kan't sit for more than 2 or 3 hours in an office type of environment (or anywhere) and has to lie down for an hour or take a long walk. Now this has limited her chances of getting a job severely, perhaps she was a secretary and thats's where her skills lie (in this particular case I don't remember) so she might end up getting jobs that pay a lot less because of her special requirement. If this is caused by a drunk driver well shouldn't he (or his insurance company) somehow compensate her for the fact she can nly earn perhaps 60% of what she used to before. This is, of course, where things become blurry but to me that is a definite sense of justice. It's not giving those people huge sums of money for nothing, it's recognizing that the damage to them is not only physical but also financial. Again, I agree with peoplehaving to take responsibility for their own actions and if you e.g. run across a wet floor, well you are going to fall and probably break a leg.
Cheers
-B
I think in the case of your friend she has a legit case but the problem is, to contradict myself..Suing for compensation is a favourite american pastime, and the compensation culture,has taken root here with a vengence,while these unscrupulous vultures {no offence to the birds} are prepared to feed off the scraps, from the victim's table, then we will be left with this unfortunate trend..
yeah, some people do sue for stupid things. But, come on if a dr. messes up on you and you are scard or changed for life in some way. Hell yeah, they should pay. Hmmm, then what the heck do we go to doctors for anyway. Hmmm, I'm sorry it was just an accident doesn't do it. I mean after all they are supposed to be schooled in this. So if they would do all the steps in there jobs they wouldn't have this problem now would they. I'm blind due to a doctor's neglence, so I don't take this topic to lightly. No, I don't sit and mope about it, and hat the dr.'s that did it to me. But at the same time i'm not going to hold there hands and say ok, it's alright it was just an accident. Know what i mean? smile- angel
Goblin, I do agree on that the suing culture here is ridiculous, they have tv comercials from lawyers who tell you to call them if anything unusual has happened to you that you could possibly make into a legal case. But, I mean, it's hard, if you're in a bank and you steal money or use your position you're fired and you'll be asked to pay back what you stole probably in addition to some undisclosed sum as penalty but when you're dealing with people it's so hard to evaluate what you could've done better and what the dmage is, some damage can never be evaluated like, losing your vission. I was diagnozed with R.B. at the age of 6 months, the doctor who checked me when I was born should've discovered that right away. It could've made a lot of difference in terms of keeping my eye sight, at least partially, it could've been fatal had it not been discovered for another 6 months. I don't hold grudges against them but I often wonder what things would've been like had they actually followed their procedures and discovered the R.B. on time, then again it might not have made any difference. It's such a complicated culture that I think the greedy human nature is bound to take hold and push it to the limits and banning that completely will also give too much power and too little responsibility to the people who are supposed to do their jobs. There are sloppy doctors and there are unscrupulous patients, it's sohard to balance out the two in a fair way. But, that being said, the culture over-all is pretty ridiculous.
Cheers
-B
same here every 10 feckin minutes I've taken to setting my watch by them...hmm thats another problem I find in medicine that there are so many grey areas ,so much is defined by the old stand by's..we cant really say, and its too early to tell...greed oh yes we are so conditioned by the media ect, into believing that we can indeed have it all,and the I'll sue you culture is part of the ruthless go getting attitude, that seems to permeate so many aspects of everyday life.
....................
I read with disbelief that F1 driver Ralf Schumacher, narrowly missed being paralysed due to american doctors, at a top hospital, missing a hairline crack in his spine following a horrific 180mph crash!...if on recovery he had raced again and had suffered another impact,the crack could have split leaving him paraplegic a disaster for him in terms of his career,and personally, he rightfully sued and won...such mistakes whether on famous people,or otherwise, are unforgivable. The guidelines on suing need to be significantly tightened up and reserved for those who really have a legitimate case.
But, well, in this case, he chooses to be an f1 driver and drive at 200mph in an unprotected car, he knows the risks of what he chooses to do, he gets paid millions and millions of dollars for it, he should expect a high risk of becoming paraplegic or even dying, it's a risk that he is taking as part of the job of being a formula one driver so whereas yes, the doctors should not have missed the crack I don't think they should pay him financial damage since money I am positive is the last thing that the guy needs.
Yes he does and he accepts the dangers, but he does not choose to be left with potentially disabling injury...You could say that about all high risk athletes,however the fact still remains these highly trained doctors were negligent, and if they can miss an injury of that magnitude on Ralf Schumacher,then what happens to Joe bloggs, who has been involved in a similar accident,will he face life in a chair due to their ineptitude possibly, if Schumacher's successful action had the desired effect, maybe the next spinal injured patient will be properly examined.
Goblin, very good point there actually, I didn't think about that.
well I absolutely agree that in such cases the doctors need to be brought to account for their negligence, and as goblin pointed out above, by being sued in this one case, hopefully they will learn from it and the next person might not be so unlucky. however, why does that have to come at a financial price .. after all, Ralf Schumacker doesn't exactly need the money, neither, in all fairness would anyone else if they had gone on to make a full recovery. and all this money that is paid out in compensation could surely be better used to better the services available in the hospitals etc? Don't get me wrong, in the case of say a person who is injured and needs likfe long care etc, of course there is a financial price to pay, but where someone made a full recovery, I don't really think it is fair they should profit from it. yes, the suit needs to be brought, but in a different way, so that something positive comes out of it for everyone, not just for the person suing.
Ahh but the big word as always is IF..and it was only through an examination by a different set of doctors,that Herr Schumacher is able to continue racing at all,if things had been different, he would not be walking now.
..........
.And as I said in the previous post, his action has had a positive effect in shocking the hospital out of its complacency which is never a bad thing...I have no problem with a successful, well paid athlete, suing a negligent hospital they were wrong and the price of their ignorance would have been astronomical for Herr Schumacher, ..as he would have lost the ability do the 1 thing he was put on this earth to do, and just how do you put a price on such an irreplacable loss.