Reply #25: Maybe you've never worked with people

[customerserviceguy]

but while 95% of the folks you deal with are decent, and just want a fair shake, there are some people out there to get everything they can. They're argumentive, they constantly are looking to capitalize on the minor faults and mistakes of others, and even when there are none to be found, they'll make them up, just so someone will give them what they want to go the hell away.

Their cases clog up the court system that prevents honest claimants from getting a fair, quick hearing, and they cause insurers to come up with a gauntlet of anti-fraud measures to weed them out, that inflict pain, trouble, and delay on those who were legitimately wronged.

Maybe you are lucky enough to live in a place where attorneys don't advertise much. Where I am, you cannot watch a half-hour of non-PBS TV without seeing something that boils down to, "Did something shitty happen to you? Well, let's see who we can sue for you!"

I am sorry to hear of your experience with the doctor, perhaps he had a lawyer clever enough to make sure there were gag orders as part of the previous settlements he made, to keep you from being able to find out that he was that bad. A major part of reform of the malpractice system would require disclosure on both sides as to what the track records were for both doctor and patient.

I'm a fan of single-payer, but why not have single-payer malpractice in this country, as well? Surely, a government entity that handled all malpractice claims would do better by people than the private industry system as far as quick and fair settlements, and "marking" of the really bad doctors and hospitals. What would be wrong with that?