At 10:27 14/08/1996 +0100, you wrote:
>Gerard Freriks wrote:
>>
>> At 08:16 on 13/8/96, [log in to unmask] wrote:
>>
>> > Paul Caldwell wrote:
>> > >
>> > > Mr Ross sends an E-mail hoping to reassure GP's. Unfortunately he has
>> >scored a........
>> > > Dr paul Caldwell
>> >
>> >
>> > 'Some of the more ludicrous medico-legal actions'? The Government, nor
>> > most people, thought it ludicrous when they had to settle up to
>> > haemophiliacs infected with HIV, nor to non-hameophiliacs infected
>> > through transfusions. Similarly when they had to do likewise recently
>> > for children infected with CJD through Human Growth Hormone. Ditto a
>> > cosmetic manufacturer injuring a customers face and employers breaching
>> > COSHH and, as a result, increasing the asthma figures. Even with regard
>> > to all the other cases in which we are involved, whether succesful or
>> > not, they all have the support of highly respected and experienced
>> > medical and scientific experts, not just lawyers.We could not get these
>> > cases off the ground without medical opinion in support.
>> >
>>
>> But the questions remain:
>> IS the route via the legal system the only way to solve the problems
mentioned?
>> Aren't there better ways?
>>
>
>
>Such as?
>
>
No win, no fee, only expenses to the other side. How many cases wouldn't
start under this scenario?
--------------------------
Dr David J Plews
email: [log in to unmask]
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|