The whole deal with America is that a lawyer or a doctor will earn a higher salary in the future due to greater years of training and not the same amount of money as say, a toll booth worker. But for some reason in determining "economic" damages by lawyers for potential medical malpractice cases all of this goes out of the window. I was told even with clear cut negligence that my "damages" were "noneconomic"- I am taking this to mean that the malpractice doesn't need a full time nurse and I am able to hold a job- but in reality I didn't train all the years I did in my chosen career path to end up somewhat lower on the ladder than I have done due to the malpractice. Even without directly killing me, the stress, the health issues caused by the malpractice is making me achieve less than I would have if the malpractice never occurred and THAT-achieving less due to less than optimal health IS ECONOMIC. I am extremely driven and my worst hate of what occurred is not that the malpractice hurt me but that it is keeping me from being all that I can be- on the other hand of the malpractice I researched- unable to open the airway of an obese man in time or some surgical error in lung transplant of a smoker- both "plantiffs" landing in the hospital in the first place was due to self destructive behavior and the latter would have died prior to 1964 when there were no transplants. My case is a basic violation of prinom nom nocere, yet everyone else whom the malpractice didn't occur to says deal with it which is sort of like saying that in spite of all of your work [in your health/life] you have to be content with minimal health- which is like communism just health in the place of dollars.
Sign up to receive a 3-part series of useful information and advice about personal injury law.