Comments on: Ripping the Veil of Secrecy from Malpractice

By: Rich Meehan

Rich Meehan — Thu, 26 Nov 2009 12:09:16 +0000

Happy Thanksgiving to you and beat Stanford!! P.S. Hope you get a shot back at the guy, and come back for your senior year. Good Luck.

By: Jim Clausen

Jim Clausen — Thu, 26 Nov 2009 11:33:13 +0000

Sorry I haven’t written in a few days…it has been a little hard to see recently. To answer your question…All of us Golden Domers keep up on our distinguished alumni! Happy Thanksgiving.

By: Rich Meehan

Rich Meehan — Sun, 22 Nov 2009 23:20:33 +0000

UCONN got lucky at the end and you guys fought like warriors. Hang in there. Also, I’m curious how you found this post from South Bend. I’d love to know.

By: Jim Clausen

Jim Clausen — Sun, 22 Nov 2009 15:29:01 +0000

Hey Dan White…who’s side are you on?

But I do agree that we should all agree to disagree.

I also think that I am really thankful (it is that time of the year you know) that UCONN did not sign that 10-year deal to play Notre Dame in football. Not only are the Huskies great in both men’s and women’s basketball, we can’t even beat them in football!

By: Dan White

Dan White — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 23:40:59 +0000

I think we should all agree to disagree. Is this Jim Clausen, the QB1 for ND?

By: Rich Meehan

Rich Meehan — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 22:36:11 +0000

I agree that purpose is laudable, but to shield this from public scrutiny doesn’t detract from improving health care. I guess we have to agree to disagree. By the way I’m a fellow Golden Domer–ND Class of 1970. At least we aren’t debating whether Charlie Weiss stays or goes. Hope you will keep reading and keep commenting I love the dialogue, and Go Irish.

By: Jim Clausen

Jim Clausen — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 21:02:57 +0000

Thanks for your response… The purpose of peer review is for all doctors to have an opportunity to review all cases of unexpected or bad outcomes. The expectation of confidentiality encourages doctors to speak freely towards the goal of improving health care. It is wrong to assume that these meetings are about discussing “mistakes”. Hopefully the review of these cases will help doctors make changes in protocols and procedures that will benefit all future patients.

A huge part of the problem is that society doesn’t seem to differentiate between bad outcomes and malpractice. Even when there are no medical mistakes, doctors are unfairly accused when bad things happen.

By: Rich Meehan

Rich Meehan — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 12:33:15 +0000

Amen to that! The truth is that liability claims expose neglect and force reform. This isn’t an indictment of doctors just bad medicine when it does happen.

By: Mary Ellen Hass

Mary Ellen Hass — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 03:58:07 +0000

We need health care reform on a number of levels. This just exposes an interesting other side to the debate about liability. Unfortunately though, the patient seems to lose out in the end with soaring health care premiums and regulatory bodies shielding patients and their families from the truth.

By: Rich Meehan

Rich Meehan — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 01:04:59 +0000

Jim
The attorney client privilege protects you, the client; not the lawyer. There is nothing that insulates attorneys from scrutiny when they are reported to the Statewide Grievance Committee. It’s all about transparency, but thanks for your comment

By: Jim Clausen

Jim Clausen — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 00:56:12 +0000

Doctors will give up their “secret” peer review the minute attorneys give up their attorney-client privilege…Come on lawyers, let’s get to the real truth about your clients…