Letters to the Editor - Hawaii Editor...

Letters to the Editor - Hawaii Editorials

There are 10 comments on the Honolulu Star-Bulletin story from Sep 21, 2009, titled Letters to the Editor - Hawaii Editorials. In it, Honolulu Star-Bulletin reports that:

No, patients should not have to relinquish their right to sue nor is "tort reform by itself," to quote Mr.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Honolulu Star-Bulletin.

“Nothing Good Can Come of This!”

Since: Oct 08

Denver, CO

#3 Sep 21, 2009
"What people want to end is the legal bounty hunt, not the right to sue and redress legitimate injury."

This is absolutely correct and well stated. We have become a litigious society. We look for opportunities to sue, rather than admit that accidents happen. This kind of attitude chases away good people who want to help others. You are seeing the result in the lack of doctors now, no it isn't the lack of money, doctors anywhere make a good living. It is the fear of being sued that makes them leave the profession. If a doctor is treating someone and makes a legitimate error, that is an accident. If, through lack of training or criminal malfeasance, he injures you, then that is something worth suing for. It used to be that accidents happened. Now we are all hoping for the accident so that we can become rich by someone's error. There is no compassion or charitable attitude, let's sue 'em all! And then we wonder why good folks want out of the profession or why sleazeball attorneys proliferate. Yes, sue for auntie's care after an accident, but don't punish the individual for an ACCIDENT. Look up the term, it means an unforeseen error.
Concerned Senior

Aiea, HI

#4 Sep 21, 2009
Mr. Lloyd, substitute the image of Pres. Bush or his name in place of Pres. Obama and you have what we have been seeing for the past eight years.
Neither distortions by either side is appropriate.
How many signs did you see that were not personally directed at Pres. Obama?
I would bet, from the images I've seen on the news programs, that there were hundreds or even thousands more than the ones denigrating our Pres.
There are racists on both sides, but not all the participants are. Weed out the lolo's and look at the larger picture.
I also grew up in the South and I also know racism when I see it, this ain't it.
Concerned Senior

Aiea, HI

#5 Sep 21, 2009
Another point Mr. Lloyd, of those 48,000 you say died prematurely. How many died due to their life styles? Drugs, alcohol, unprotected sex?
A similar number die in automobile accidents and yet we still see alcohol sold at gas stations.
How many did not opt to purchase health insurance plans? My point is that no one knows the particulars of each case. I would get a second opinion on those stats. To quote a statistician friend, "Figures don't lie, but liars can figure."
Von

Aiea, HI

#6 Sep 21, 2009
"End bounty hunt in health care"

Don't say that because I like Sue.

About this Health reform now? It's not good for every one and a few people will get burnt not even counting more government control and the loss of jobs.

I myself don't like it, but I do like Sue.
Former Hawaii resident

Fayetteville, NC

#7 Sep 21, 2009
As a family physician, I order tests frequently that I know statistically have a very low chance of having a positive result - strictly because attorneys have conditioned Americans that if there is a bad outcome it must be someone's fault. The difficult part in the healthcare reform debate is that the politicians promise, and Americans want, something for nothing. If there is no tort reform, defensive medicine will be practiced, which drives up costs. Ya can't have both cheap care and the ability to sue with flimsy evidence of any wrongdoing. (No one disputes payments to redress legitimate malpractice). Even with tort reform, it will probably be several years after enactment before physicians trust that they don't have to cover their butt by ordering tests to confirm their clinical decision-making.
Former Hawaii resident

Fayetteville, NC

#8 Sep 21, 2009
In regards to racism, the true overt racist signs are few and far between, and dwarfed in numbers by signs of legitimate protest. It is just easier to attack the messenger than to defend bad policy. Secondly, comparing Obama's plans to Nazism is not racism. You can debate whether his far-reaching expansion of government powers and the welfare state is similar to National Socialism (which is what Nazi means), but to lump those beliefs in with racism is a true stretch. By far the overwhelming opposition to Obama is not based on race but on his policies. Finally, being opposed to Obamacare does not mean that a person or political party is opposed to reform - it just means that the person/party disagrees with Obama's plan for reform. There are many legitimate reasons to oppose his ideas and the Democrat's congressional plans. If the Prez truly wants a society in which "there are no red states and no blue states but just united states", then he should start over with bi-partisan Congressional committees working on different facets of health care reform (example, a working group on tort reform, one on Medicare reform - which could find all of that waste and fraud that he talks about - one on coverage for the uninsured, etc). Each working group should seek citizen input, present their proposed plan for comments, and pilot their plan in a small area before implementing nationwide. Then, if something doesn't work, it can be stopped before it is imposed on the country as a whole.
Yeah

Vancouver, Canada

#9 Sep 21, 2009
Former Hawaii resident wrote:
As a family physician, I order tests frequently that I know statistically have a very low chance of having a positive result - strictly because attorneys have conditioned Americans that if there is a bad outcome it must be someone's fault. The difficult part in the healthcare reform debate is that the politicians promise, and Americans want, something for nothing. If there is no tort reform, defensive medicine will be practiced, which drives up costs. Ya can't have both cheap care and the ability to sue with flimsy evidence of any wrongdoing.(No one disputes payments to redress legitimate malpractice). Even with tort reform, it will probably be several years after enactment before physicians trust that they don't have to cover their butt by ordering tests to confirm their clinical decision-making.
The day anyone can provide a persuasive, workable argument on how tort reform will "save" money, I'll probably jump on board. The problem for everyone else is there's no reason to lower premiums without showing a case for any better care.

Tort protects doctors.I don't see how patients figure in on the equation.
Yeah

Vancouver, Canada

#10 Sep 21, 2009
Former Hawaii resident wrote:
In regards to racism, the true overt racist signs are few and far between, and dwarfed in numbers by signs of legitimate protest. It is just easier to attack the messenger than to defend bad policy. Secondly, comparing Obama's plans to Nazism is not racism. You can debate whether his far-reaching expansion of government powers and the welfare state is similar to National Socialism (which is what Nazi means), but to lump those beliefs in with racism is a true stretch. By far the overwhelming opposition to Obama is not based on race but on his policies. Finally, being opposed to Obamacare does not mean that a person or political party is opposed to reform - it just means that the person/party disagrees with Obama's plan for reform. There are many legitimate reasons to oppose his ideas and the Democrat's congressional plans. If the Prez truly wants a society in which "there are no red states and no blue states but just united states", then he should start over with bi-partisan Congressional committees working on different facets of health care reform (example, a working group on tort reform, one on Medicare reform - which could find all of that waste and fraud that he talks about - one on coverage for the uninsured, etc). Each working group should seek citizen input, present their proposed plan for comments, and pilot their plan in a small area before implementing nationwide. Then, if something doesn't work, it can be stopped before it is imposed on the country as a whole.
Pretty hard when the unhappy states only want to secede since they can't get their way.
The Right Approach

Waimea, HI

#11 Sep 21, 2009
Yeah wrote:
<quoted text>The day anyone can provide a persuasive, workable argument on how tort reform will "save" money, I'll probably jump on board. The problem for everyone else is there's no reason to lower premiums without showing a case for any better care.
Tort protects doctors.I don't see how patients figure in on the equation.
Did you mean lower "premiums" or lower (doctors')*charges*?

In Texas, it seems to be working in terms of lowering premiums, although there are both pluses and minuses (see article), and the jury is apparently still out.

http://www.acpinternist.org/archives/2005/01/...

It's also attracted a flood of doctors to Texas - something Hawaii could really use, especially on the Neighbor Islands.

http://blogs.wsj.com/health/2008/05/19/doctor...
The Right Approach

Waimea, HI

#12 Sep 21, 2009
Former Hawaii resident wrote:
In regards to racism, the true overt racist signs are few and far between, and dwarfed in numbers by signs of legitimate protest. It is just easier to attack the messenger than to defend bad policy. Secondly, comparing Obama's plans to Nazism is not racism. You can debate whether his far-reaching expansion of government powers and the welfare state is similar to National Socialism (which is what Nazi means), but to lump those beliefs in with racism is a true stretch. By far the overwhelming opposition to Obama is not based on race but on his policies. Finally, being opposed to Obamacare does not mean that a person or political party is opposed to reform - it just means that the person/party disagrees with Obama's plan for reform. There are many legitimate reasons to oppose his ideas and the Democrat's congressional plans. If the Prez truly wants a society in which "there are no red states and no blue states but just united states", then he should start over with bi-partisan Congressional committees working on different facets of health care reform (example, a working group on tort reform, one on Medicare reform - which could find all of that waste and fraud that he talks about - one on coverage for the uninsured, etc). Each working group should seek citizen input, present their proposed plan for comments, and pilot their plan in a small area before implementing nationwide. Then, if something doesn't work, it can be stopped before it is imposed on the country as a whole.
Well said! <applause>

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Honolulu Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
leeward lolo returns to waianae (Dec '14) 22 min Joe Balls 10
News Second state audit blasts Health Connector for ... 1 hr American_Infidel 1
500,000 gallons of raw sewage dumped into the o... 8 hr American_Infidel 7
Mr. President, Donald Trump 8 hr American_Infidel 67
News Kakaako homeless to receive sweep notices 8 hr Normal is OK 8
News Husband and wife plead guilty to mortgage fraud... (Apr '09) 10 hr Joe Balls 71
What Hawaii is really like. (Jan '08) 12 hr Joe Balls 269
More from around the web

Personal Finance

Honolulu Mortgages