Quote:
|
Originally Posted by dculkin
I agree that there is a danger of Monday-morning quarterbacking in this type of case, but the same is true in any case when a patient claims that he or she did not give informed consent to a medical procedure. Are you saying that those people should not be allowed to seek compensation?
|
No, I'm not saying that they shouldn't be allowed to present their case....
But if their case is found to have no merit, or is merely an obvious money-grab, then the judge/jury should have the right to laugh them right out of the courtroom.
And if I were the defendant, I would slap them with a counter-suit to recover my legal costs, lost income, as well as compensation for damage to my professional reputation, etc.
The Canadian case you referenced is also a weak one, in my opinion.
Are doctors in Canada required by law to administer tests for EVERY POSSIBLE birth defect that could theoretically occur? If not, then how was the doctor negligent? If parents want tests run for EVERY inherited condition that their unborn baby might potentially be afflicted with, then they should be responsible for requesting (and PAYING for) such extensive tests.
From reading what you posted about that case, I feel that the court made the WRONG decision.
Mike