Reply #93: I'm not sure what you are trying to convince me of....

[AmericanDream]

I don't think you are getting what Edwards sued for... he sued for "negligence" on the basis of the medical statutes that existed at the time... those have changed since. At that time doctors thought that cerebral palsy could be prevented by c-section and so doctors were expected to adhere to that standard... now, that due to further research, that statute has been changed and c-sections have been ruled out as a preventive measure. But side-effects (like increased number of c-sections) does not change the fact that their was malpractice involved in ignoring the established medical statutes.

By the way, you say that edwards melodramatically channeled the baby, and you are right, he did ... but in his closing statement. You have to read the case history to see how he built the case from concrete evidence and expert witnesses.. it was an extensive trial and the closing statement was only putting the lid on it.

So, this really doesn't prove anything and frankly, I don't even know what you are trying to prove. If you are trying to prove that some of his cases led to increased number of c-sections, then I don't deny that... however, that doesn't mean his cases were based on so-called "junk science" because the science he used was the one established by the medical opportunity at the time but has changed ever since. But at that time the doctor WAS ignoring the statute!