If a state agency acts on only 2.2% of the complaints received on malpractice, should it remain in existance?

by **teyrnon72** » Fri Nov 18, 2011 4:05 pm

The California Medical Board received 6747 complaints against doctors in 1992-1993 and took disciplinary action on only 149 (2.2%). Couldn't that few cases be better handled by the regular court system? That would be a great savings for the state. . The way it operates now it serves to protect the incompetent and the murderers in the medical profession.

by **chatima** » Fri Nov 18, 2011 4:18 pm

a court alleging a tort and a medical review board are 2 diffetnt things. court is for monetary damages the board is to see if a person is capable of beng a doctor. and ur stats are 16 years old

by **donough** » Fri Nov 18, 2011 4:24 pm

a court alleging a tort and a medical review board are 2 diffetnt things. court is for monetary damages the board is to see if a person is capable of beng a doctor. and ur stats are 16 years old

Do you want all 6747 complaints to go to the courts, and a jury convened for each one to determine whether it's letitimate or not?

And what makes you think all these cases are real? Many people call and complain because they are upset for some stupid reason.

Advertisments:

Sponsor Links: