2 ms·
I was thinking similar-- a generic law firm could probably get a small payout, but wouldn't necessarily uncover as many details about the situation since they'r
by jacobgkau 1y ago
I was thinking similar-- a generic law firm could probably get a small payout, but wouldn't necessarily uncover as many details about the situation since they're not personally involved (and, as you said, would probably have less publicity as well).
- monero-xmr 1y agoI think your worries are misplaced. This is bread and butter for lawyers. The problem with this case is it’s very fuzzy. We are seeing one side of the story as a lawsuit is certainly coming. Doctors are human and deal with high stress, life or death situations. They have medical malpractice insurance exactly for this. Even if you have a 99.9% perfect doctor, they will see many thousands of patients over their career, and that still means 1/1000 will die. People play the lottery on far worse odds. I found the article interesting less as a damning of the medical system and more of a spiritual situation. None of us know when a freak random event will end us. It is a sobering reality
- jacobgkau 1y ago> I found the article interesting less as a damning of the medical system and more of a spiritual situation. None of us know when a freak random event will end us. It is a sobering reality Should we say the same about potentially life-threatening defects in our food supply? "Mistakes happen, so it's not about fixing or preventing them, it's about spiritually accepting that you might get a bad can of meat and die." Obviously not. > that still means 1/1000 will die. People play the lottery on far worse odds. I don't play the lottery, though. But I can't choose whether or not I might need emergency care one day. So comparing odds to the lottery isn't useful. Make the odds as good as possible.