"I was in shock": This story of the messed up mastectomy is pathetic -- a ridiculous mistake that should never, ever happen. The pathologist who made the mistake should face disciplinary action and have his or her work regularly checked. However, I'm troubled by the implicit idea of the woman's attorney, Chris Messerly, that some unlimited amount of damages should be in play. What are two breasts worth? What is brain damage worth? What is death of a spouse or loved one worth? Well, for starters, if your anticipated lifetime income is, say, $1,367,750 (that is, the national average annual income times your number of years worked, in this case 50, indicating you start working at 17 and retire at 67), I would think that would be the maximum amount you could sue for. Why should a medical mistake (admittedly, a terrible, stupid mistake, but not one that renders you incapacitated or in a vegetative state) be a financial boon beyond what you otherwise would have likely earned?
Further, I posit that the average annual lifetime earnings test would be reasonable no matter who is involved in a medical malpractice case like this. If Bill Gates went in for laser eye surgery and came out blind, he should be able to sue for up to $1,367,750 -- not $56 billion, or whatever his lifetime earnings will be. The award shouldn't be different based on the individual's income; rather, it should be based on the average person's income. Otherwise, the wealthy have the opportunity to sue for more based on their income than a lifetime McDonald's employee with exactly the same medical malpractice claim. I'll go farther with this another time.
Social Security fix: Nobel laureate and famed security market line guru Franco Modigliani has a better solution in the Sloan Management Review than any coming from the Bush administration.
Make it with an avocado: Here is more than you wanted to know about avocados. And here's still more.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home