Homosexual Liberal Atheists ~ What's UP with that?

[Tired_Old_Man 1]

Everyone wants someone else to shoulder the blame! Drives me CRAZY!!!!

Remember the woman who sued McDonald's (and won) because she tried to drive with a cup of hot coffee between her legs and it spilled and scalded her hoo-hoo? Maybe restaurants should give everyone an IQ test before they serve them, since common sense seems to be such a rare commodity! And bars should be equipped to administer sobriety tests, just so they don't make a human error in judgment and over-serve some idiot.

People always use that McDonald's coffee lawsuit, but people should look into the facts first.

McDonald's was fined 1000's of time prior to the incident of the woman being burned for selling coffee too hot to drink. Over 700 people had been previously burned by McDonald's coffee. There are laws in every state that say that a product must be usable for its intended purpose when sold, but McDonald's constantly broke that law by selling coffee too hot to drink. The McDonald's coffee was not a few degrees hotter than most other coffees or what the suggested maximum temperature should be but 40 to 50 degrees hotter. They were ordered over and over again to adjust their thermostats (internal) on their coffee makers. McDonald's elected to keep breaking the law and paying the (what to them are meaningless) fines.

So, there was a lawbreaker with expensive lawyers thumbing their nose at the law and paying minor fines. That was taken into account along with the woman doing the stupid thing of putting the coffee between her legs. The jury had to determine after listening to expert testimony from doctors if a cup of coffee at a legal temperature would have caused the burns that she sustained. The jury determined that a cup of coffee at a proper temperature would not have caused the physical damage that Micky D's coffee did to her and because of the previous flaunting of the law, they made McDonald's pay, in the punitive award, an amount which would/should inspire them to follow the law in the future.

By the way, the jury found McDonald's 80% to blame and the woman 20% to blame and the judgment was adjusted for that, plus on appeal the award was cut way down.

[Carlene 12]

See.....it's CRAZY!!! The entire US judicial system, with regard to personal responsibility, is totally screwed up! And it makes being a professional anything almost impossible. You have to CYA with all kinds of insurance, which drives up the price of goods and services, and then we bitch about the cost of living.

My DH receives a periodical from his old union and this week's featured a member whose wife gave birth to identical triplets. This was a natural conception - no fertility drugs or treatment involved. I quote from the story...

Their first major roadblock was getting a doctor to actually take the case.

They went to at least 10 highly recommended obstetricians, all of whom refused to take the case because of the risks associated with identical triplets.

"All the doctors urged us to either end the pregnancy or reduce it from triplets to twins, because of the statistical problems associated with this type of multiple birth," said Alex.

I'm about 99% certain those 10 doctors were thinking "lawsuit" if they took this woman on as a patient and the outcome was not good - resulting in the death of one or more babies, or perhaps handicapped children. So for financial reasons, they suggested she KILL one or all of her unborn children??? How bad is that?

[Tired_Old_Man 1]

And without these lawsuits we would have products that explode in our faces and electric saws that cut people's feet and fingers off, and pajamas for infants that burn out of control and thousands of other products that would make our lives a lot less safe.

People can always quote a case here and there that sounds absurd, but in the majority of cases, our lives are made better by them.

[Carlene 12]

McDonald's was fined 1000's of time prior to the incident of the woman being burned for selling coffee too hot to drink.

Fined by whom? I was aware of the case history, evidence, etc but could find nothing about fines. McDonald's had previously paid out approximately $500,000 in hot coffee claims. I am unaware of any statute that regulates the temperture of coffee. I have Starbucks heat my grande, non-fat, light foam, latte to 180 degrees. But I don't hold the cup between my legs.

[Carlene 12]

And without these lawsuits we would have products that explode in our faces and electric saws that cut people's feet and fingers off, and pajamas for infants that burn out of control and thousands of other products that would make our lives a lot less safe.

People can always quote a case here and there that sounds absurd, but in the majority of cases, our lives are made better by them.

I wonder how many people were killed or seriously injured by consumer goods pre-product litigation? I don't remember hearing of many when I was younger.....say, 30 years ago. I have read about the electric saws that dismembered people.....AFTER they removed the safety guard.

The law requiring children's sleepwear to be fire retardant is virtually worthless, by the way. It doubled the price of pajamas, so low-income people (who are the ones most likely to be using open flames in their homes in the first place) just stopped buying them. Their kids sleep in sweat pants and tee shirts. And after a number of times thru the washer/dryer, the retardant is no longer effective.

[wavydaby 1]

Lables on stuff kill me.

On my curling iron: "Do not place heated device in to any body cavity."

On a bucket: "Do not place head in bucket filled with Water, drowning my occur."

You know that someone had to sue these people based on "they didnt tell me it could happen".

I belive the rise of easy high limit credit available has led us down the path of "easy money lawsuits"

[Tired_Old_Man 1]

How do you think the safety guards got on the saws?

When I was a child, my uncle was a carpenter and a circular saw cost about two week's pay. Today, even a minimum wage earner can buy a circular saw for less than a day's pay. Carpenters didn't cut their fingers off (usually), but inexperienced people doing DIY projects need protection.

About the fines that (I claimed) McDonald's had paid out. I read years ago that department of health inspectors in many local municipalities had fined McDonald's restaurants, but since I can not find the proof to back it up (now), I will leave it with 700 previous burns and $500,000 in Mcdonald's previous payouts as proof that they knew what they were doing and were not going to change.

The Wall Street Journal  wrote (September 1, 1994), "The testimony of Mr. [Christopher] Appleton, the McDonald's executive, didn't help the company, jurors said later. He testified that McDonald's knew its coffee sometimes caused serious burns, but hadn't consulted burn experts about it. He also testified that McDonald's had decided not to warn customers about the possibility of severe burns, even though most people wouldn't think it possible. Finally, he testified that McDonald's didn't intend to change any of its coffee policies or procedures, saying, 'There are more serious dangers in restaurants.' "

(Originally) Liebeck sought to settle her claim for $20,000, but McDonald's refused.

[Carlene 12]

How do you think the safety guards got on the saws?

About the fines that (I claimed) McDonald's had paid out. I read years ago that department of health inspectors in many local municipalities had fined McDonald's restaurants, but since I can not find the proof to back it up (now), I will leave it with 700 previous burns and $500,000 in Mcdonald's previous payouts as proof that they knew what they were doing and were not going to change.

Oh, I absolutely agree with your research. I had read the same thing myself many times before. But since I regularly purchase coffee at 180 degrees, I was wondering how it could be in violation of any ordnance to sell scalding hot coffee. Could be a jurisdictional thing, I suppose, but Starbucks is an international chain and they advertise that they will "customize" your drink - including making it hotter/colder.

[Tired_Old_Man 1]

Oh, I absolutely agree with your research. I had read the same thing myself many times before. But since I regularly purchase coffee at 180 degrees, I was wondering how it could be in violation of any ordnance to sell scalding hot coffee. Could be a jurisdictional thing, I suppose, but Starbucks is an international chain and they advertise that they will "customize" your drink - including making it hotter/colder.

We are setting a very poor example by being so civil about issues that we strongly disagree about.

I feel sorry for the person who started this thread to bait the LBT members into a knock-down drag-out fight.

[Carlene 12]

Lables on stuff kill me.

On my curling iron: "Do not place heated device in to any body cavity."

On a bucket: "Do not place head in bucket filled with Water, drowning my occur."

You know that someone had to sue these people based on "they didnt tell me it could happen".

I belive the rise of easy high limit credit available has led us down the path of "easy money lawsuits"

Yeah....lots of ladies use their curling irons for dildoes, don't ya know. Especially HOT curling irons.

I bought one of those umbrella strollers when my first grandchild was born. It had a label that said "Caution. Remove child before folding stroller". Good thing, because I know a lot of people who might attempt to fold their kid up inside the stroller, then stow both in the trunk. However.....unless the child is under a foot tall, you really can't fold him/her up with the stroller. Must be a warning for people with micro-midget children. Is that a new fashion statement craze? Pocket/purse children? I'll have to check out Paris Hilton's web site to see if she's sporting one.

[Tired_Old_Man 1]

Side Note: When I was an aircraft mechanic, I worked mostly on aviation electronics (Avionics) and that included (at least for a while) working on the electric coffee makers. During one stretch, I was working the hangar and for a few weeks, I fixed coffee makers in the repair shop. These machines have multiple safeguards including max temperature adjustments.

One day, two safeties failed at once in flight, and coffee came gushing out at a cabin attendant hitting her right where the thighs meet. She was carried from the plane on a stretcher and was out of work for almost a year. I was glad that I had not been the one to have fixed that coffee-maker prior to installation.

[Carlene 12]

We are setting a very poor example by being so civil about issues that we strongly disagree about.

I feel sorry for the person who started this thread to bait the LBT members into a knock-down drag-out fight.

You feel sorry for Paladin? Gee....you really ARE a Liberal, aren't you?

[Tired_Old_Man 1]

You feel sorry for Paladin? Gee....you really ARE a Liberal, aren't you?

NO!! But it sounded good.:faint:

Well, yes, I am a Liberal, but a very Sarcastic Liberal.

[Wheetsin 714]

I'm about 99% certain those 10 doctors were thinking "lawsuit" if they took this woman on as a patient and the outcome was not good

I can guarantee that. A friend of mine is a doctor (she is finishing her residency this year, and has elected to go into emergencya medicine -- ER doctors. But as much as she would like to return home to our state, she won't, because we're pretty high up on the list of outrageous medical malpractice premiums. When I last visited her, she gave me some stuff to read. It was a while ago dso I don't remember the numbers exactly, but the average rookie salary for a doctor in that field was just under $200k/yr. In emergency mediciine, since she would automatically be dealing with higher risk cases, she has to carry a policy with much more coverage. And just like new drivers cost more to insure, so do new doctors. Anyway... once you subtracted her med mal premiums first year, her salary was cut to something like $118k. And people want to bitch about how much their doctor's fees are. Yeah, $118k is a nice income, but the fact doesn't change that she's paying close to 50% of her salary back, just to be able to do her job.

Between premiums and student loans, new doctors really don't make a ton of money. Private practice makes more, but what new doctor is going to open a private practice? She lives in Florida in a houes that needs a new roof and drives a Hyundai because it's what they can afford right now.

There's a debate around who's to blame... is it the lawsuits, or is it the insurance companies making up for investment lawsuits (investment of premiums and spillover reserves are where most insurance companies make their money, not in collecting premiums as most people think.)

Doctors are vacating my state like crazy. My PCP is thinking about leaving and going to a state where the premiums are more affordable. It's sad.

BTW, Wheets was once a pre med student, but focusing on medical research (specifically genetics and study of congential malformations). She's very happy she opted not to pursue her MD.

[Tired_Old_Man 1]

I can guarantee that. A friend of mine is a doctor (she is finishing her residency this year, and has elected to go into emergencya medicine -- ER doctors. But as much as she would like to return home to our state, she won't, because we're pretty high up on the list of outrageous medical malpractice premiums. When I last visited her, she gave me some stuff to read. It was a while ago dso I don't remember the numbers exactly, but the average rookie salary for a doctor in that field was just under $200k/yr. In emergency mediciine, since she would automatically be dealing with higher risk cases, she has to carry a policy with much more coverage. And just like new drivers cost more to insure, so do new doctors. Anyway... once you subtracted her med mal premiums first year, her salary was cut to something like $118k. And people want to bitch about how much their doctor's fees are. Yeah, $118k is a nice income, but the fact doesn't change that she's paying close to 50% of her salary back, just to be able to do her job.

Between premiums and student loans, new doctors really don't make a ton of money. Private practice makes more, but what new doctor is going to open a private practice? She lives in Florida in a houes that needs a new roof and drives a Hyundai because it's what they can afford right now.

There's a debate around who's to blame... is it the lawsuits, or is it the insurance companies making up for investment lawsuits (investment of premiums and spillover reserves are where most insurance companies make their money, not in collecting premiums as most people think.)

Doctors are vacating my state like crazy. My PCP is thinking about leaving and going to a state where the premiums are more affordable. It's sad.

BTW, Wheets was once a pre med student, but focusing on medical research (specifically genetics and study of congential malformations). She's very happy she opted not to pursue her MD.

Even though we have been on opposite sides in the recent lawsuit debate, I agree with most of your post.

There has to be something done to make awards more appropriate and to deal with the fact that doctors are not God and in an emergency, they can not be expected to have the advantage of hind-sight.

Capping lawsuit judgments is not the answer, since insurance companies have unlimited resources and can appeal until the legal fees eat up the award (if capped).

Doctors who treat someone with all the classical symptoms of a heart attack should be immune from large payouts if waiting for extensive testing would have allowed the patient to die before the test results would have said heart attack or not. The doctor in that case would have had no choice but to treat for the heart attack, even if it turns out to be something else.

OB/GYN is probably where the most abuse is. No doctor has the ability to know what only a God would know. There has to be leeway between making a prudent decision that was wrong and making decisions that were not prudent. Maybe what needs to be done is for a group representing plaintiff's lawyers and a group representing insurance lawyers to reach agreement on a group of doctors to be used for testimony at trials to tell the judge and jury whether the doctor made prudent decisions taking all possibilities into account. The expert doctors would have to be smart, but not the kind that are professional second guessers and hopefully the two groups could agree on fair doctors to be on the list. As it stands now, lawyers can always find experts to take their side of the argument, no matter how absurd the argument is.