There’s a commercial on the radio that suggests you shouldn’t buy a house from a taxi driver passing by. The premise, of course, is that the driver has little or no knowledge of the house or of you. The obvious truth of this simple message extends to almost every facet of our lives. Very few of us would hire someone for something as important as being a babysitter for our children or as relatively mundane as repairing our car without being sure that the person we hire knows what they are doing and has a positive track record that we can trust. . . With that basic premise in mind, I am always amazed at how often a person hires an attorney to handle a medical malpractice case (as well as many other types of cases) without knowing who the attorney is; what experience they may have in the field; what may be your track record of success in the field; or, what is your position in the eyes of your peers and adversaries.
When a person is injured through medical malpractice, a lawsuit against a doctor or health care provider is often the furthest thing from their mind. Health concerns; one’s ability to continue working and support a family; and the ability to reclaim your place as a productive member of society are among the much more pressing issues. Typically, it is not until these concerns have been addressed or accepted that people even consider whether malpractice might have occurred. Unfortunately, the realization that one’s life-altering injury may have been preventable often adds to the difficulty of the situation.
It is within this emotionally charged and disturbing context that the search for a medical malpractice attorney often begins. Of course, most people don’t know which attorneys focus their practice in a specific area or which attorneys focus their practice in the highly technical and difficult field of medical malpractice. Most attorney advertisements suggest that the attorney who paid for the advertisement is an expert in all areas of the law, including medical malpractice. With personal tensions and no way to separate which attorneys really know how to handle a medical malpractice case, many people will hire the wrong attorney.
Another part of the difficulty an injured person faces when considering a lawsuit is the perceived role of lawsuits in today’s society. Lawsuits are not and should not be about “quick money” or delaying a business for a “payday.” The civil justice system is about accountability, about putting the blame where it belongs. It’s about making sure the injured are compensated for what they can never recover. It is about making sure that the individual, regardless of his economic or social status, has the same rights as the rich and powerful. It is about assuring society that we are all equal.
Not all errors can or should be the basis of a lawsuit. However, there are many valid reasons to file a lawsuit. Obviously the simplest reason is to fix a mistake. There is also a great benefit to others in our community and our society as a whole in that meritorious claims preclude similar conduct. Unfortunately, the role of lawsuits in society has been considerably damaged by media attention to a handful of lawsuits, some of which were filed incorrectly to fit an agenda and some of which were filed correctly but never should have been filed. . The end result is that, for a large number of people, the law is almost the definition of what is wrong in our current society. Critics of our judicial system describe our courts as out of control, lawyers as greedy, and lawsuits as damaging to the economy and society at large.
Obviously, these are positions taken to push an agenda. These critics do not address the accountability and equality that a lawsuit can provide. They do not account for the positive social changes that the courts have generated. They don’t take into account that workplaces and products have been made safer by the effects of a lawsuit. They fail to account for the millions of people who have been given back part of their ill-gotten gains swindled by stockbrokers and corporations. They do not account for the many people who do not need to turn to public assistance for their health needs because a lawsuit has provided sufficient financial resources. In short, they represent none of the benefits to society of a trial. Rather, they focus on a few ill-conceived or poorly prosecuted case examples as representative of our system as a whole.
Take a moment to consider who is driving these agendas: the insurance companies; big business; negligent doctors and others. We must consider, before agreeing to their agenda, whether they have our best interests at heart or whether their agenda is designed to avoid liability and increase profits. There are many questions a person should ask themselves before even considering filing a lawsuit. The most important of those questions, however, is why, over the centuries, have wars been fought and governments overthrown by people who demand the equality and justice guaranteed by our courts?
A lawsuit is not appropriate in all cases, but the decision to exercise this right must be an individual decision about what, under the circumstances, is right for an injured person and their family. The doctor whose mistake puts a child in a wheelchair for life or a young wife and mother in an untimely grave does not have to live with the family he or she has destroyed. The CEO whose decision to increase profits by using a toxic additive need not live in the town poisoned by that product. The insurance company accountant who refuses to pay for the treatment of a seriously ill person who paid for that coverage does not have to see the person die because he did not receive the treatment. These individuals do not have to live with the ramifications of their decisions and actions and their agenda to avoid liability should not drive the injured person’s decision whether or not to file a lawsuit.
Additionally, people injured by medical malpractice often consider the personal and social impact of filing a lawsuit. Not infrequently, the injured person or their family personally appreciates the doctor they suspect is doing them harm. Even more often, a person injured by a medical professional is made to feel that a lawsuit against that doctor will cause the doctor to leave the practice or move to another state. These sentiments are generated by a well-orchestrated and well-financed campaign by the medical lobby. The clearly intended purpose of his message is to prevent judgments out of guilt and fear.
It is well documented that not only does New York have one of the highest physician populations in the country, but more than 50% of malpractice is caused by less than 5% of our physicians. Unfortunately, in most cases, it is the doctors who make up the 5% who orchestrate the media and political spin of the medical lobby. Instead of focusing their attention on improving the quality of care or increasing medical reimbursement rates by HMOs and the government, which would benefit all doctors and, to a large extent, all of society, their attention is focuses on preventing the most seriously injured from seeking redress. soon. Not surprisingly, such an impact only serves to help those doctors who commit bad practices and, in general, harm society.
Again, the decision to file a lawsuit must be made on an individual basis. Whether a doctor, while perhaps not a friend, spoke kindly or gently when he or she was negligent can be a determining factor in an individual decision. The final question for the individual making the decision to pursue a case against a physician with a pleasant personality or demeanor is whether the wrong that was done, while clearly unintentional, is one that we would like to see repeated. The medical profession, in general, does not discipline malpractice. As such, the only opportunity to stop a doctor from continuing an unsafe practice or procedure is through the courts. Whether one makes this decision for oneself, a parent, or a child, the issue is less about who we like and more about whether we would feel comfortable knowing that someone else’s child or loved one has been hurt because we allowed the highly funded, and, ultimately, the false story about doctors leaving the state deters us from the social good of preventing bad medicine.
Having made the decision to pursue a potential lawsuit, the injured party must consider which attorney will prosecute the case on their behalf. As discussed above, choosing the right attorney should involve determining the most suitable person to win the lawsuit. Too often, the decision is made with the wrong criteria. The doctors, hospitals, insurance companies, and corporate wrongdoers who caused the injury in the first place have spent considerable time and effort convincing people injured by their negligence that all attorneys can handle any case to the same standard. skill relative. They know that the lack of understanding, experience, or knowledge of the attorney representing a person injured through negligence, even early in an investigation, can seriously damage that attorney’s ability to successfully resolve even the most meritorious case. The position of lawyers in society, which is often self-inflicted, has brought us to a place where an injured person frequently hires the first lawyer they see; a relative; a friend; or, the guy who advertises on TV and radio. While some may be qualified to handle a negligence case, the reality is that most will not. It goes without saying that the generally poor results that result when an unqualified attorney handles a complex malpractice case exacerbates the poor reputation of attorneys in society and the willingness of litigants to feel that any attorney will do. The reality is that not all attorneys are capable of handling medical malpractice cases which are, by their very nature, complicated and difficult.
When making a decision about who will represent you, your child, or your loved one, the decision should be based on the same criteria that you would rely on for any other difficult decision. Does the attorney have experience with these types of cases? How has this attorney and his firm performed in other negligence cases? What is the position of the lawyer in the community as a whole and in the smaller community of malpractice lawyers? What do fellow attorneys say about him or her? What do opposing attorneys say about him or her? How do you interact with the attorney? Is he or she someone you feel you can trust? Does the attorney understand the complexities of medicine and the law surrounding your case? Was this attorney directed to her by someone who had her best interests at heart or by an advertisement or a person with her own agenda or profit motive? In short, is this person the best person in the field to properly, professionally, and successfully prosecute this case for you, your child, your parent, or another loved one?
Insurance companies and corporate America have carefully researched the attorneys who want to work for them defending claims brought by people injured by their negligence. They only hire the best attorneys with the skills to succeed, the knowledge of their subject matter, and the experience to maximize results for their clients. Before you hire an attorney to represent you in a complex case, you should do the same. It can be overwhelming and it can be difficult to work with the various candidates. However, the decision of which attorney to hire is too important to be left to chance.
