Personal malpractice insurance....yes or no?

Originally Posted by LarryG

Total generalization.

Don't incorrectly think all attorneys are making over $100 K.

Again, if you're judgment proof, then no attorney is gonna throw away good money after bad. But if you've got assets, watch out baby... you're fair game.

(J. Huffman, RN... Could use a little help here... How do you explain to people how much it would cost the average attorney to go after a working joe's assets? And that they would never get a return.
Asking for help because Huffman has a great way with words.)

Larry G,
We are not talking about rich attorneys. Any civil suit costs money. The attorney has to decide if the end justifies the means.
Suing an individual, the end never justifies.... unless that person is Bill Gates. (Then it would be even more difficult and expensive)
When an attorney sues, money goes out, but none comes in for a long time. Poor attorneys cannot afford to go that distance.

Originally Posted by Jay Levan

I am very surprised that anyone would think that their hospital would cover them in the event of a lawsuit, after all the horror stories that I have read(Not Heard) Case in point; lawsuits are directed at Hospitals first, Doctors second, and Nurses third, there is a pool of funds for lawsuits held sort of in escrow and guess who gets the benefit of the least amount of that account?? That's right the Nurse, and often if there isn't enough to go around the nurse has to fend for themselves, do some research and you will see of what I speak

Jay,
Read the whole thread. Hospital's don't cover... the insurance does. Different ball game.
The pool of funds... I admit I have never heard of this. Trust me, if there were money other than insurance... attorney's would find a way to get it. Also, the hospital's WANT you to appear like the perfect nurse...

Whaaaaaaaa?!?

No offense, but that's totally nuts.

Lots of companies sue individuals.

Originally Posted by LarryG

Whaaaaaaaa?!?

No offense, but that's totally nuts.

Lots of companies sue individuals.

No offense taken bacause, apparently, you are not talking about malpractice anymore?
Companies do not sue individuals unless there is gain. That gain might be publicity, affecting issues long term (again, publicity), or money.

To say "lots of companies sue individuals" isn't quite correct. Or, I might not understand what you are saying. Could you explain it?

Almost, but not quite, right.

Talking about bucks strictly, if the net benefit meets / exceeds the pre-established gain threshold, they'll sue. (Applies to malpractice specifically, but generally also to any financial context.)

Originally Posted by LarryG

Almost, but not quite, right.

Talking about bucks strictly, if the net benefit meets / exceeds the pre-established gain threshold, they'll sue. (Applies to malpractice specifically, but generally also to any financial context.)

Don't know about net/gain. Do know that attorneys will not spend thousands of dollars on "maybe's"
Suing individuals who are making house payments, car payments, etc.. isn't something attorneys do.
Many nurses have misconceptions about the legal field, and what is done in lawsuits.
The real truth is that attorneys are not "going after" individuals. No money in it.

Believe any fantasy you wish.

In real life, the above happens every day.

Originally Posted by LarryG

Believe any fantasy you wish.

In real life, the above happens every day.

There are alot of misconceptions regarding malpractice insurance.

I worked in the legal field.

If nurses will listen to experienced nurses for medical/nursing advice, why won't nurses listen to people experienced in the legal field?

You said "Lots of companies sue individuals". This just isn't true. Or are you speaking of something other than malpractice?

The reality is that attorneys go after individuals who have assets which are available. In most such lawsuits, the attorney makes money as a percentage of the damages collected against the one sued.

So, if damages are won of, say, $600,000, the attorney might get 1/3 of that: $200,000. (This would depend on how things were originally worked out with the one doing the suing, the plaintiff).

The attorney is going to first have to lay out money to try the case. Money for the attorney's time, money for expert witnesses, money for investigation, etc.

Let's say you make a sue-able error, and a patient wants to sue you. Let's also say that you -- like many reading this board -- aren't rich. Let's say you live pretty much from paycheck-to-paycheck. Why would the attorney agree to take your case? The suit might be one the attorney could easily win. But there's nothing to seize, and the court's not going to order you into slavery or something.

The court could rule against you for millions, but if you don't have the money/assets, the plaintiff doesn't get anything besides the satisfaction of knowing they were right. And the attorney gets nothing for his/her time.

Attorneys are usually (like most of us) out to make money. They are not doing their work as a cause. If you have essentially nothing of value, why on earth would they sue you?

If you have malpractice insurance, suddenly you have instant assets.

A trial is no fun. It is a headache, your name will -- rightly or wrongly -- be dragged through the mud, and many people will assume you are guilty, even if you aren't.

Most nurses I know would prefer to avoid that. It's why I have no malpractice insurance. And it's why -- unless a nurse has assets bigger than what most people have -- I suggest that others do the same.

Jim Huffman, RN

Think we've been there already.

Bob Dylan said it best: "When you got nothing, you got nothing to lose."