Re[2]: Queries

[julian.gibbs@mcmail.vanderbilt.edu]

     In sharp contrast, I think this case is a good argument for tort 
     reform.  The physician knew that, should he recommend continuation of 
     the pregnancy, and the women delivered a child with even a trivial 
     abnormality, both he and the radiation would be blamed.  Thus, it was 
     likely that his recommendation for terminating the pregnancy was based 
     on fear of litigation.  It may be argued that such fear is wrong; I 
     agree with that argument.  Nonetheless it is widespread.  The source 
     of this fear must be eliminated.
     
     Do not criticize a man until you have walked in his moccasins...
     
     Julian Gibbs
     


______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: Re: Queries
Author:  radsafe@romulus.ehs.uiuc.edu at +inet
Date:    2/19/97 4:10 PM


> Date:          Wed, 19 Feb 97 15:03:47 -0600 
> Reply-to:      radsafe@romulus.ehs.uiuc.edu
> From:          "Sandy Perle" <sandyfl@ix.netcom.com>
> To:            Multiple recipients of list <radsafe@romulus.ehs.uiuc.edu> 
> Subject:       Re: Queries
     
> > Here's a case of where radiation phobia literally killed someone. 
> 
> This as another example why I am all for NOT limiting medical 
> malpractice law suit awards. This decision, if true and there 
> are no other factors included, based on what was presented in the 
> Radsafe post, is totally irresponsible.> 
     

    ======================================================================
     S. Julian Gibbs, DDS, PhD                           Voice 615-322-3190
     Professor of Radiology                                FAX 615-322-3764
     Vanderbilt University Medical Center
     Nashville TN 37232-2675    Internet julian.gibbs@mcmail.vanderbilt.edu
     ======================================================================