Cop Dies During 3-way Sex, Widow Wins 3 Million

[Greybeard]

http://content.usatoday.com/communities ... -million/1

[SHMIV]

And this is why health care is expensive.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

[TacticalMom]

"What in the hell? Even if you remove the crazy added bg story about the three way sex, the widow is suing the doctor because he did not tell him that he had a heart condition and to stay away from strenuous activity?

Would she have stayed with him had she found out? What is she saying that the doctor was negligent for not telling him so she missed out on their golden years of divorce?

Also if I was having that kind of problem in my chest, and went to a doc, I would be taking it easy just in case. " *strike all that* That was what I was going to write.

Now I am changing it to, what the hell, we as Americans are a very litigious group of people... *shakes head and walks away*

[Taggure]

"What in the hell? Even if you remove the crazy added bg story about the three way sex, the widow is suing the doctor because he did not tell him that he had a heart condition and to stay away from strenuous activity?

Would she have stayed with him had she found out? What is she saying that the doctor was negligent for not telling him so she missed out on their golden years of divorce?

Also if I was having that kind of problem in my chest, and went to a doc, I would be taking it easy just in case. " *strike all that* That was what I was going to write.

Now I am changing it to, what the hell, we as Americans are a very litigious group of people... *shakes head and walks away*

Please do not hold back and just tell us how you really feel about it

[Newgunguy]

Yeah this just proves my point that this country, and the world, is on a moral decline. We need to get prepared for complete failure of our nation as stupid decisions like this is made by our legal teams. Sure it might be years away, but it is coming and I myself would much rather be ready then caught with my pants down. Also as to the people that go and post all their preps on youtube and the Doomsday show, man that Isn't very smart in my opinion. Yet I do really like seeing others ingenuity on how to store things for long term. Well this is enough from me on this one, don't want to say much more and get banned from this site like I have from others.

Charles.

[dorminWS]

He dropped dead during 3-way sex with a woman who was not his wife and the widow got $3Million? MAN! If that was SWMBO, she'd have at least TWO reasons she'd be damn glad I was dead.

On second thought, it would be 3 reasons. In addition to (1) "he was foolin' around and therefore death was too good for him", and (2) "I got $3MILLION bucks to spend on clothes and jewellry and I'm rid of that old fart, too", you'd have to add (3) "it saved me the trouble and legal hassle of killin' him myself."

[TacticalMom]

"What in the hell? Even if you remove the crazy added bg story about the three way sex, the widow is suing the doctor because he did not tell him that he had a heart condition and to stay away from strenuous activity?

Would she have stayed with him had she found out? What is she saying that the doctor was negligent for not telling him so she missed out on their golden years of divorce?

Also if I was having that kind of problem in my chest, and went to a doc, I would be taking it easy just in case. " *strike all that* That was what I was going to write.

Now I am changing it to, what the hell, we as Americans are a very litigious group of people... *shakes head and walks away*

Please do not hold back and just tell us how you really feel about it

Yeah every once in a while Taggure my inside voice rears its ugly head... I pushed it back down. Please carry on with your day *grins*

[Reverenddel]

If I died from having a 3-way with someone who was not my "wife" (IE: girlfriend), the funeral director is gonna have a helluva time cracking that smile on my face.

And my widow would be MAD about it!

"Why is he smiling like the Joker?" (Widow grumbles) -from Hell.

[Kreutz]

The jury on Friday found that Dr. Sreenivasulu Gangasani and the Cardiovascular Group were 60% to blame for Martinez's death from atheroschlerotic coronary artery disease, agreeing with the plaintiff that the doctor did not properly diagnose and treat Martinez for high blood pressure, chest pains, shortness of breath and irregular heartbeat.

Failure to diagnose is the leading reason doctors order so many damned tests, as they are liable for damages.

[Wolvee]

Looks like im going to have cansel my plans on Friday night. Lol

Everyone involved in that story seems to be retarded.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

[grumpyMSG]

The jury on Friday found that Dr. Sreenivasulu Gangasani and the Cardiovascular Group were 60% to blame for Martinez's death from atheroschlerotic coronary artery disease, agreeing with the plaintiff that the doctor did not properly diagnose and treat Martinez for high blood pressure, chest pains, shortness of breath and irregular heartbeat.

Failure to diagnose is the leading reason doctors order so many damned tests, as they are liable for damages.

I have to say Kreutz has hit the nail on the head. What so many people fail to realize is: the doctor won't pay the money, his malpractice insurance will. The doctor will end up paying a higher rate to the insurance company. He will pass that cost on to his patients, who pay it through their insurance company. Now those patients will complain about their insurance rates climbing every year. So, the same people who cheer the windfall of the widow will actually be paying her the millions, a couple of dollars at a time. Just like the Culpeper taxpayers will in: http://vagunforum.net/general-discussio ... 8-100.html

[dorminWS]

The jury on Friday found that Dr. Sreenivasulu Gangasani and the Cardiovascular Group were 60% to blame for Martinez's death from atheroschlerotic coronary artery disease, agreeing with the plaintiff that the doctor did not properly diagnose and treat Martinez for high blood pressure, chest pains, shortness of breath and irregular heartbeat.

Failure to diagnose is the leading reason doctors order so many damned tests, as they are liable for damages.

I have to say Kreutz has hit the nail on the head. What so many people fail to realize is: the doctor won't pay the money, his malpractice insurance will. The doctor will end up paying a higher rate to the insurance company. He will pass that cost on to his patients, who pay it through their insurance company. Now those patients will complain about their insurance rates climbing every year. So, the same people who cheer the windfall of the widow will actually be paying her the millions, a couple of dollars at a time. Just like the Culpeper taxpayers will in: http://vagunforum.net/general-discussio ... 8-100.html

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Yup, and all that time the trial lawyers are skimming off A LOAD o' all that dough, out of which they contribute heavily to the democrats, who made the Obamacare mess in the name of "fixing" health care while steadfastly refusing to even discuss tort reform.

[Kreutz]

Tort reform is a piece of the puzzle in lowering costs, but interestingly since many privately insured Americans are under a managed care policy (HMO, POS, etc.) their care is already well, managed, and over-aggressive defensive medicine generally is not practiced for them and costs are thus contained.

Tort reform is a symptom of a much more serious underlying disease in the US healthcare system in which ever newer and more expensive (and usually unnecessary) tests are aggressively marketed as the new "standard of care", which puts pressure on the docs to use them, or else an expert witness will tear them apart for not ordering said tests and getting them found liable for the dreaded FTD.

[Reverenddel]

I think limited liability for new procedures, or radical treatments would be fine. When you're suffering from cancer, or AIDS, or Parkinson... the result cannot be worst than the disease.

[dorminWS]

Tort reform is a piece of the puzzle in lowering costs, but interestingly since many privately insured Americans are under a managed care policy (HMO, POS, etc.) their care is already well, managed, and over-aggressive defensive medicine generally is not practiced for them and costs are thus contained.

........................................................
"costs are thus contained."??? Are you kiddin' me? Managed care, while it may control some aspects of cost of care to some degree, does not protect doctors from tort liability. In fact, I can think of citcumstances where decisions made in the name of managed care could buttress a malpractice case. It gets non-doctors involved in medical decisions. This isn't all bad all the time, because doctors (many of them being prone to playing God to a greater or lesser extent) frequently make decisions for non-medical reasons. But the veto of doctor's orders by non-doctor "managed care administrators" can compromise care, and also waste time as these decisions are contested.
........................................................

Tort reform is a symptom of a much more serious underlying disease in the US healthcare system in which ever newer and more expensive (and usually unnecessary) tests are aggressively marketed as the new "standard of care", which puts pressure on the docs to use them, or else an expert witness will tear them apart for not ordering said tests and getting them found liable for the dreaded FTD.

...........................................................
No, I think you've got that backwards. The pushing of new technology as an increased standard of care is symptomatic of the vast and uncontrolled expansion of medical tort (indeed, ALL tort) liability. Purveyors of this new technology, being aware that doctors and other care providers are so afraid of liability, seek not only to exploit that fear, but to raise the standard of care to require their technology so there will be (or at least providers will fear there is) no choice but to buy it.

The liberals and the traial lawyers are really in the same business. They're both in the "something for nothing" business. The fact that there's no such thing as something for nothing is not a problem for either of them as long as they can hide the costs of the "somethings" they purport to give away. Liberals do it with hidden taxes, indirect taxes (like those on corporations and capital formation), deficit spending and inflation due to both overregulation and currency devaluation. Trail lawyers do it just as Kreutz indicated; by soaking insurors, who pass it on to doctors and hospitals (and medical equipment and drug manufacturers, etc), who pass it on to either consumers or the government. If it is passed on to the government, government then in turn passes it on to consumers through taxes, etc. (see liberal, above). The legal system (and by that I mean judges, legislatures, lawyers AND JURIES), in my opinion needs to clean up its act and start compensating actual injuries but only in strict relationship to their demostrable economic impact; and quit treating tort plaintiffs like they were lottery winners.

[Kreutz]

You need a hobby besides arguing with me old timer, you're not getting younger.

[dorminWS]

You need a hobby besides arguing with me old timer, you're not getting younger.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
And you needed a better answer, but you didn't have it - did you?

[KaosDad]

Now I am changing it to, what the hell, we as Americans are a very litigious group of people... *shakes head and walks away*

And I am suing all of you for . . . I'll let the Cochran Group figure that out.

[OakRidgeStars]

[Diomed]

Nineteen posts in and no one has posted it? Must I?