Re: Tort Reform -- NO FAULT

From: art fougner, md (evsono@pipeline.com)
Tue Aug 17 06:52:06 2004


Devil's in the details ...

art

At Mon, 16 Aug 2004, Larry Glazerman wrote: >
>Joe, with all due respect, my suggestions about a “no fault” system (which
>sort of started this thread), didn’t necessarily mean to apply exactly to
>the no-fault auto situation, but, in a general sense, setting up a system
>where funds were available to compensate injured parties (even those with a
>bad outcome that was NOT the result of negligence, such as brain-damaged
>babies), without having to prove negligence, fault, responsibility, etc.
>
>I can’t help but believe that this would save tons of money, and make
>everyone but the trial lawyers happier. I’m also not naïve enough to think
>it has a snowball’s chance in hell of really happening :-)
>
>Larry R. Glazerman, MD
>Ob-Gyn at Trexlertown, PC
>610-402-0161
>l.glazerman@rcn.com
>
> _____
>
>From: ob-gyn-l@obgyn.net [mailto:ob-gyn-l@obgyn.net] On Behalf Of
>DoctorJoe@aol.com
>Sent: Monday, August 16, 2004 8:05 PM
>To: Multiple recipients of list OB-GYN-L
>Subject: Re: Tort Reform -- NO FAULT
>
>In a message dated 8/16/04 11:22:11, dean@thehuffpeople.net writes:
>
>If a "NO FAULT" model were to be established, then perhaps the money to run
>the
>system should come from a "tax" on medical receipts, perhaps 5%, perhaps
>more
>or less.
>
>Just remember what "no-fault" actually means. If you had "no-fault" medical
>malpractice insurance, the patient's insurance company would pay the guy's
>damages? It's not quite the same scenario.
>
>Joe P.
>
>"no-fault
>
>1: of, relating to, or being a motor vehicle insurance plan under which
>someone injured in an accident is compensated usu. up to a stipulated limit
>for esp. actual losses (as for property damage, medical bills, and lost
>wages) by that person's own insurer regardless of who is responsible for the
>accident and is prohibited from or limited in his or her right to sue the
>responsible party"

--
art fougner, md
ich bin ein New Yorker




use when must restrict search to only the ob-gyn-l forum...
Enter search keywords:
Returns per screen: Require all keywords:

Return to  OB-GYN-L Mail a New Message to the Forum: ob-gyn-l@obgyn.net
Forum Administrator: geffrey.klein@obgyn.net
Report Technical Problems: webmaster@obgyn.net
Last Updated: Wed Jul 2 04:37:48 2008

The American Medical Association is no longer designating CME hours for AMA Category II CME credit. However, physicians themselves may self designate learning activities as Category II CME credit hours if they feel it is of sufficient educational merit and meets the formal definitions of continuing medical education. OBGYN.net believes these interaction in this forum meets these criteria. For further information see the AMA web site.