[Deboogle!.]

Well, no, people here still go after the doctor too, if anything happens :lol:

 

[TankingTheSet]

Well, no, people here still go after the doctor too, if anything happens :lol:

Yes, I did have the impression that lawyers and lawsuits are 10x-100x more common in the US compared to Europe for example. :lol: But I think what it is issue here is primarily vague long-term complications (5-20 years) rather than immediate complications due to surgery. In Sweden the surgery was introduced 10-15 years before the US and there was a lot more experience with long-term side-effects and patient satisfaction and subsequent controversy and eventually outlawing of the surgery. If the Swedish experience is anything to go by I suspect in 5 to 15 years there will be more controversy and litigation related to the long-term effects of the surgery in the US, especially related the subset of doctors that are actively commercializing and soliciting patients for the surgery.

 

[cobalt60]

I think the surgery at the moment has an "approval" rating for certain indications by the governmental medical authorities in the US, and is generally reimbursed and covered by insurance. As long as a doctor documents a condition for which the surgery is officially indicated among his patients, he will feel legally protected since most of the blame would fall on the authorities in the event of a legal backlash.

You obviously do not live in the US nor are you part of the medical system.
Doctors get sued and lose all the time even when the case is poorly substantiated.

 

[Deboogle!.]

Yes, I did have the impression that lawyers and lawsuits are 10x-100x more common in the US compared to Europe for example. :lol: But I think what it is issue here is primarily vague long-term complications (5-20 years) rather than immediate complications due to surgery. In Sweden the surgery was introduced 10-15 years before the US and there was a lot more experience with long-term side-effects and patient satisfaction and subsequent controversy and eventually outlawing of the surgery. If the Swedish experience is anything to go by I suspect in 5 to 15 years there will be more controversy and litigation related to the long-term effects of the surgery in the US, especially related the subset of doctors that are actively commercializing and soliciting patients for the surgery.

I forget exactly, but I believe it was Germany that is even more litigious than the US. the US is bad for some things, but not for others, so you can't lump all of Europe together Sweden functions in a very different way from the US legally-speaking (and i'm sure medically-speaking), so I dunno if you can draw too many parallels. You may very well be right but it's impossible to say.

You obviously do not live in the US nor are you part of the medical system.
Doctors get sued and lose all the time even when the case is poorly substantiated.

 

[cobalt60]

I forget exactly, but I believe it was Germany that is even more litigious than the US. the US is bad for some things, but not for others, so you can't lump all of Europe together Sweden functions in a very different way from the US legally-speaking (and i'm sure medically-speaking), so I dunno if you can draw too many parallels. You may very well be right but it's impossible to say.

No need for a hug here; I have never been sued The best defense against a lawsuit is having a very strong bond/relationship with your patients; and knowing what the hell you are doing

 

[Deboogle!.]

Of course you have never been sued, I would be shocked to find out otherwise Still, I know what it's like to be in a profession that gets misunderstood a lot so my still stands for you

 

[TankingTheSet]

You obviously do not live in the US nor are you part of the medical system.
Doctors get sued and lose all the time even when the case is poorly substantiated.

I guess this means as a doctor in the US you have to pay an extremely high insurance premium to protect yourself?

I am not a medical professional but the situation is quite a bit different in the Netherlands as far I can discern:

- Legal cases in the regular courts are very rare. It is very difficult to prove a claim (note that there is no jury in our legal system).
- Doctors generally still enjoy a high level of immunity in the legal system and are highly esteemed, which is due to the legacy of being part of the historical elite.
- There is a court of medical arbitration but it only concerns itself with disciplinary action against negligent or incompetent doctors and does not award compensation to victims. In the vast majority of cases the doctor is not found to be in error.
- Doctors generally do not report errors and medical errors are often covered up, not mentioned in medical records and hospital staff do not report on colleagues.
- Doctors are highly organized in trade organizations and protected by the legal entity of the hospital.
- Until recently the concept of errors being made (especially in a hospital setting) was virtually unheard of.
- General Practitioners are open to discussion with patients and more vulnerable to criticism but in general medical specialists (including surgeons) have their practice in hospitals and are held in high esteem, often authoritarian to patients and other hospital staff, highly legally protected, make a lot of money (much more than all other hospital staff), and considered virtually infallible.

I think the more emancipated position of doctors like in the US is better in many ways (they are considered professionals, not an untouchable part of the elite), but being inundated in legal suits is the other extreme. I think a big drawback of the Dutch system is that incompetent doctors (especially specialists) will often not be identified in their protected position and continue to practice. There is very little public information about the relative merits, success rate or experience of doctors.

 

[TankingTheSet]

I should make a commment on my previous message, I had a discussion with Stupid Dream afterwards who knows a lot about the subject, and she confirmed what I outlined in the message. She also illustrated the key point, however, which is that the Dutch (medical) legal system deviates a lot from even some neighbouring European countries. What is comes down to is that the Dutch legal system retains a lot of archaic heritage that is still providing a lot of legal protection/immunity to the historical "elite". In this context the "elite" includes professions like doctors, the legal profession itself, and notaries (which are still legally required for many types of transactions and charge indiscriminate fees).

Observe that the Netherlands is virtually the only country where there is no jury-based law whatsoever. Law is adminstered by the "elite" itself, which may explain why over time the legal system has resisted changes that would reduce the legal immunity of the elite.

 

[DartMarcus]

Should we create Amer 2009 cheering thread?
Amer starts the season in Brisbane qualies and plays The Allmighty Gooch in first round. It gonna be difficult match, as Guccione is always strong in Australia.
His part of the draw:
(4)BELLUCCI, Thomaz BRA vs BALL, Carsten AUS
ISNER, John USA vs STOPPINI, Andrea ITA
CRUGNOLA, Marco ITA vs (WC)VERRYTH, Mark AUS
DELIC, Amer USA vs (7)GUCCIONE, Chris AUS

 

[Deboogle!.]

Yes we should, why don't you do it Tough match for him :awww:

 

[cobalt60]

Yes we should, why don't you do it Tough match for him :awww:

Very tough on a fast surface with the Gooch serve. And of course all of Gooch's MTF fans to cheer him on :lol:

 

[Deboogle!.]

6-4 7-5 over Guccione

 

[cobalt60]

I am pleasantly surprised actually :lol: