Debster
Well-known member
14 million would be a great start for a foundation!!! Deb
Todayshow Interview With John Ritter's Widow
- Thread starter thenewmarket
- Start date
Help Support Valve Replacement Forums:
- Status
aussigal
Well-known member
Some things have come to my mind from this discussion...
Why couldnt she have used the settlement she already got to start this "foundation" ???....
Didnt Johns untimely death already raise awareness of Aortic Dissections???
Arent there already some places and/or foundations dedicated and experienced with this that could use the injection of cash she is pursuing and has already received???
Personally, I dont agree with these people that go around suing/blaming others.
Why couldnt she have used the settlement she already got to start this "foundation" ???....
Didnt Johns untimely death already raise awareness of Aortic Dissections???
Arent there already some places and/or foundations dedicated and experienced with this that could use the injection of cash she is pursuing and has already received???
Personally, I dont agree with these people that go around suing/blaming others.
Against my better judgement, I have decided to comment on this thread. And, because our satellite internet connection is very slow (because of all the snow in the air), I am commenting without checking out the links that have been supplied.
I have litigated on both sides of medical malpractice cases, and I believe there are some things that don’t at first come to mind.
Here is the first problem I see: Our system (for good but also bad reasons), works in completely different ways for the wealthy. I litigated as a plaintiff’s lawyer in a case where the malpractice was so bad as to have received serious consideration for criminal prosecution. It resulted in agonizing burns to a child. The “negligence” was much worse than anything in Ritter’s case, and the results of the mal-practice lasted a lifetime.
This was a big case, but would never be valued at anything near 67 million dollars.
Compare the effects on the doctor in my case with what may very well happen here. Our defendant had more than adequate coverage for the expected verdict, and continued on his practice. The conduct in this particular case was very serious, but this doctor continues to practice, and I heard very good things about him in following years. There was fair compensation, an otherwise good doctor got a serious reality check, and the system worked. This portion of the Ritter case is, in my opinion, a perfect example of the system gone amok.
I think it would be helpful to look at this case from the perspective of the hospital and Drs. Perhaps the compensation for Ritter’s entire treatment with a good outcome would approach $100,000.00. (Actually, the compensation for the emergency room portion of the case would have been a great deal less than that, perhaps as little as $15,000.00). How many of us would want to sign on for a difficult job with a $15,000.00 upside but a bottom line risk of 67 million dollars? You need to realize that no one carries that amount of insurance. For any individuals involved there is a very real prospect of bankruptcy, and these may well have been excellent doctors.
In addition, state regulations probably require the insurance companies involved to set aside financial reserves to cover the limits of their liability. This gets to be very expensive for all of us.
Finally, I applaud the idea of any charitable foundation-but is this really the way to do it? I am not very comfortable with extracting 67 million dollars out of the health care system in order for Mrs. Ritter to establish her foundation. I have general appreciation for our medical system. If you follow these things, you know this system is on the verge of collapse. There are many reasons, but cases like this are part of the problem. In my humble opinion, there is the potential for a great deal more harm than good here.
And my saying that doesn’t diminish in the least my sympathy for Mrs. Ritter.
I have litigated on both sides of medical malpractice cases, and I believe there are some things that don’t at first come to mind.
Here is the first problem I see: Our system (for good but also bad reasons), works in completely different ways for the wealthy. I litigated as a plaintiff’s lawyer in a case where the malpractice was so bad as to have received serious consideration for criminal prosecution. It resulted in agonizing burns to a child. The “negligence” was much worse than anything in Ritter’s case, and the results of the mal-practice lasted a lifetime.
This was a big case, but would never be valued at anything near 67 million dollars.
Compare the effects on the doctor in my case with what may very well happen here. Our defendant had more than adequate coverage for the expected verdict, and continued on his practice. The conduct in this particular case was very serious, but this doctor continues to practice, and I heard very good things about him in following years. There was fair compensation, an otherwise good doctor got a serious reality check, and the system worked. This portion of the Ritter case is, in my opinion, a perfect example of the system gone amok.
I think it would be helpful to look at this case from the perspective of the hospital and Drs. Perhaps the compensation for Ritter’s entire treatment with a good outcome would approach $100,000.00. (Actually, the compensation for the emergency room portion of the case would have been a great deal less than that, perhaps as little as $15,000.00). How many of us would want to sign on for a difficult job with a $15,000.00 upside but a bottom line risk of 67 million dollars? You need to realize that no one carries that amount of insurance. For any individuals involved there is a very real prospect of bankruptcy, and these may well have been excellent doctors.
In addition, state regulations probably require the insurance companies involved to set aside financial reserves to cover the limits of their liability. This gets to be very expensive for all of us.
Finally, I applaud the idea of any charitable foundation-but is this really the way to do it? I am not very comfortable with extracting 67 million dollars out of the health care system in order for Mrs. Ritter to establish her foundation. I have general appreciation for our medical system. If you follow these things, you know this system is on the verge of collapse. There are many reasons, but cases like this are part of the problem. In my humble opinion, there is the potential for a great deal more harm than good here.
And my saying that doesn’t diminish in the least my sympathy for Mrs. Ritter.
witzkeyman
Well-known member
very well said. she is just a golddigger. she has already received 9 million for John's death. now she wants a lot more. she is greedy, and I question her motives, especially for marrying John. medical expenses need to be kept down. she is already living a good life in Beverly Hills. the poster who claims that she is grieving, and the widow really upset me. she isn't grieving. she is money hungry.
witzkeyman said:
I want to say that I don't see it that way. It is very difficult to ever know why anyone does the things they do. I can join you in hoping she will think better of this, but either way I am not prepared to describe her as greedy, etc.
MrP
Well-known member
First, I find the personal attacks on John Ritter's widow mean spirited. Just because a person is wealthy is no reason to attack her or conclude one dang thing! She lost her husband, and her daughter lost her father. How would you feel? She sincerely believes the cardiologist and radiologist were negligent and need to recoginize this publicly. And yes, doctors sometimes make huge mistakes...sometimes life is lost. Just because the doctor tried his best is no excuse for incompetence if this was the truth here. Ms. Ritter is certainly entitled to make her case in a court of law and present facts relevant to her claims. For example, she may have good evidence from radiology imaging two years prior to her husband's death that support her claim her husband's aorta was in fact enlarged grossly. We don't know all the facts. If a jury decides in her favor based upon facts, then right on for her.
John Ritter's death raised great awareness concerning aortic and bicuspid disease, but more awareness will certainly save lives.
MrP
John Ritter's death raised great awareness concerning aortic and bicuspid disease, but more awareness will certainly save lives.
MrP
Antcipated Future Earnings
Antcipated Future Earnings
In wrongful death litigation, it is not uncomon, it is the norm for surviving spouses to seek compensation for anticipated future earnings. That the surviving spouse, Ms. Ritter, is an actor capable of high earnings is not a factor here. This is a matter for lawyers, judges, and perhaps juries to sort
out.
http://www.azwrongfuldeath.com/arizona_wrongful_death_damages.asp
Antcipated Future Earnings
In wrongful death litigation, it is not uncomon, it is the norm for surviving spouses to seek compensation for anticipated future earnings. That the surviving spouse, Ms. Ritter, is an actor capable of high earnings is not a factor here. This is a matter for lawyers, judges, and perhaps juries to sort
out.
http://www.azwrongfuldeath.com/arizona_wrongful_death_damages.asp
Magic8Ball
Well-known member
Time to move on folks, nothing to be gained from this other than a 10 page thread descending into personal attacks.
Everyone has their opinion and no-one is going to type "ah, i never thought of that, i guess your opinion is correct and mine is incorrect" so we have nothing to gain.
I'll keep my opinion on this to myself in the hope that we will spend our time responding to the other posts on this site from people looking for support in their hour of need.
Regards.
Everyone has their opinion and no-one is going to type "ah, i never thought of that, i guess your opinion is correct and mine is incorrect" so we have nothing to gain.
I'll keep my opinion on this to myself in the hope that we will spend our time responding to the other posts on this site from people looking for support in their hour of need.
Regards.
Blanche is exactly right as to what what the law provides. What I was attempting to address is whether it is time to consider changing the law. Unless and until the law is changed, anyone who cares to can take full advantage of it.
But these legal remedies are not set in stone. At one time many states did not allow the collection of any damages for ?wrongful death?, no matter what the individual circumstances were. I definitely support the change over the years to a more liberal measure of damages. But, those of us who are citizens of this country, need to think about the effects of multi-million dollar verdicts on our health care system. This should be a major interest for everyone of us.
If there was one thing I wish I could contribute to our understanding on this board it would be the vulnerability of our existing procedures for financing health care. Everybody who looks at the numbers agrees that substantial change is inevitable. This is just like many other areas in life. If we sit back and wait for the train wreck we will pay more dearly than necessary.
But these legal remedies are not set in stone. At one time many states did not allow the collection of any damages for ?wrongful death?, no matter what the individual circumstances were. I definitely support the change over the years to a more liberal measure of damages. But, those of us who are citizens of this country, need to think about the effects of multi-million dollar verdicts on our health care system. This should be a major interest for everyone of us.
If there was one thing I wish I could contribute to our understanding on this board it would be the vulnerability of our existing procedures for financing health care. Everybody who looks at the numbers agrees that substantial change is inevitable. This is just like many other areas in life. If we sit back and wait for the train wreck we will pay more dearly than necessary.
Well I watched the video, and disregarding the alleged missed diagnosis 2 years earlier one glaring thing stands out from what she said. When he got to the hospital a chest x-ray was ordered. Four hours later he had still not recieved the chest x-ray. Those are four very crucial hours he may have lost if the chest x-ray would have revealed either the dissection or blood in his chest cavity. When a patient is brought into the ER in critical condition (they thought he was having a heart attack which would fit that description), a diagnostic test is ordered, and four hours later the test had not been performed someone (either the ER or Radiology) dropped the ball in a major way. I'll reserve judgement on Ritter's widow until the trial is over. If she wins a settlement (for probably much less than she's asking for) and doesn't follow through with her intentions of starting a foundation for aortic disease awareness then I will insult her integrity. Until then I think I will hold off on the negative comments about her.
Ross
Well-known member
This thread is interesting. How it got from a possible good thing turned bad lies with how you see things. I hope she does start some sort of foundation to educate people about aneurysms. From my very own personal experience, I could have easily been John. I often feel guilty that I cheated death, 2 times now. That's more then anyone should have face in their lifetime.
I believe anurysms to be more of a problem then the medical field gives it credit for. I bet lots of people we know died of them and never saw it coming.
With that being said, lets either support the threads purpose or drop it and move on. It's purpose is NOT bashing Mrs. Ritter.
I believe anurysms to be more of a problem then the medical field gives it credit for. I bet lots of people we know died of them and never saw it coming.
With that being said, lets either support the threads purpose or drop it and move on. It's purpose is NOT bashing Mrs. Ritter.
K
Karlynn
Dennis - thank you for giving us your professionally experienced position. I couldn't agree more.
The effects of these types of law suites on our medical system are destructive. She may get something, and she may start a foundation - but it's going to be with our money, because the cost of this will trickle down to all of us and it's effects will have significantly inflated the amount that this action ends up costing us all. I'd rather just write out a check myself - and have the ability to control my donation.
Doctors and hospitals who are negligent need to be held accountable, but this has gotten way out of hand. Our insurance costs are outrageous and good doctors quit practicing because they can't afford their malpractice insurance.
The effects of these types of law suites on our medical system are destructive. She may get something, and she may start a foundation - but it's going to be with our money, because the cost of this will trickle down to all of us and it's effects will have significantly inflated the amount that this action ends up costing us all. I'd rather just write out a check myself - and have the ability to control my donation.
Doctors and hospitals who are negligent need to be held accountable, but this has gotten way out of hand. Our insurance costs are outrageous and good doctors quit practicing because they can't afford their malpractice insurance.
Christina L
Well-known member
Now come on -
Now come on -
we are all entitled to an opinion on this subject. We aren't "discussing" religion or politics, we are debating a matter that we here on VR.com know more than most about - the medical establishment and the cost of medical care.
I feel John's widow is wanting to keep the lifestyle that she is accustomed to and this is all about money. If some of you want to believe that she is a grieving widow and that she wants to help others (gag) then so be it - YOUR opinions and I have mine.
There were stories posted here of misdiagnosed heart ailments - and as I was thinking about this thread last night, I remembered while living in my small town in Iowa, a lady with 5 daughters and a hubby got breast cancer - she was treated for it and seemed to be in remission. Not long after her treatment for BC, she went in to her doctor's office one day complaining of flu-like symptoms. Her doctor told her to go home, take an aspirin (or something like that) and rest. She died that night of a massive heart attack (her heart had been weakened by the chemotherapy from her cancer).
This family did not sue - I highly doubt the thought crossed their minds.
These things happen EVERY day - the human body is complex - a doctor is not a psychic or GOD!!!! Hello!
Anyway....I find this lawsuit revolting and dispicable. Let me have my opinion and others here, also. I am mad because while this woman becomes even more filthy rich if she wins this lawsuit, thousands of others undergoing medical care will be suffering financially because of her greed - and God help the doctors she is suing.
http://www.charlotte.com/entertainment/story/478444.html
Christina L
Now come on -
we are all entitled to an opinion on this subject. We aren't "discussing" religion or politics, we are debating a matter that we here on VR.com know more than most about - the medical establishment and the cost of medical care.
I feel John's widow is wanting to keep the lifestyle that she is accustomed to and this is all about money. If some of you want to believe that she is a grieving widow and that she wants to help others (gag) then so be it - YOUR opinions and I have mine.
There were stories posted here of misdiagnosed heart ailments - and as I was thinking about this thread last night, I remembered while living in my small town in Iowa, a lady with 5 daughters and a hubby got breast cancer - she was treated for it and seemed to be in remission. Not long after her treatment for BC, she went in to her doctor's office one day complaining of flu-like symptoms. Her doctor told her to go home, take an aspirin (or something like that) and rest. She died that night of a massive heart attack (her heart had been weakened by the chemotherapy from her cancer).
This family did not sue - I highly doubt the thought crossed their minds.
These things happen EVERY day - the human body is complex - a doctor is not a psychic or GOD!!!! Hello!
Anyway....I find this lawsuit revolting and dispicable. Let me have my opinion and others here, also. I am mad because while this woman becomes even more filthy rich if she wins this lawsuit, thousands of others undergoing medical care will be suffering financially because of her greed - and God help the doctors she is suing.
http://www.charlotte.com/entertainment/story/478444.html
Christina L
Ross
Well-known member
I'm only trying to keep the thread on track and not splinter off into 3 different discussions in one thread.Christina L said:
M
Mary
Ross said:
And I for one, appreciate it.
briansmom
Well-known member
My 17 YO son's health was ruined because doctors failed to see or look for his dissection on the chest CT that they FINALLY ordered. Because they missed it he had a massive heart attack and his heart appears to be permanently damaged. Yes, we are suing. He will never be able to work a normal job, etc. What other choice do we have? I am a business owner and suing is certainly against my instincts, but I do not know how else to help my son have some sort of normalcy in his life.
I hope that her lawsuit raises awareness and that doctors will not be so quick to dismiss dissection symptoms. It could save a lot of lives and preserve people's health. Everyone on this site with aneurysms should thank God that they were diagnosed in time. Most of you are going on to lead normal lives as a result.
And there is my 2 cents worth!
I hope that her lawsuit raises awareness and that doctors will not be so quick to dismiss dissection symptoms. It could save a lot of lives and preserve people's health. Everyone on this site with aneurysms should thank God that they were diagnosed in time. Most of you are going on to lead normal lives as a result.
And there is my 2 cents worth!
Marguerite53
Premium Level User
Me, too, Ross. Thanks.
And I for one am outta this thread except to say that I started a new thread (CNN story with happy ending) about a woman in Canada who had no idea she had an aortic tear until she became pregnant (in vitro) and was having diagnostic exams due to the pregnancy. The aorta ruptured when her pregnancy was at 35 weeks (typical 40). This woman had open heart surgery and a Ceasarean section simultaneously and has left the hospital with her (then) 4 pound baby 10 days later ..everyone healthy.... to begin her life as a mother. Doctors say they very likely would never have known about the aortic tear had she not been a high risk pregnancy and the thorough looking over saved her life, and her child's.
If this doesn't illustrate what could be going on out there.... I don't know what does.
Marguerite
And I for one am outta this thread except to say that I started a new thread (CNN story with happy ending) about a woman in Canada who had no idea she had an aortic tear until she became pregnant (in vitro) and was having diagnostic exams due to the pregnancy. The aorta ruptured when her pregnancy was at 35 weeks (typical 40). This woman had open heart surgery and a Ceasarean section simultaneously and has left the hospital with her (then) 4 pound baby 10 days later ..everyone healthy.... to begin her life as a mother. Doctors say they very likely would never have known about the aortic tear had she not been a high risk pregnancy and the thorough looking over saved her life, and her child's.
If this doesn't illustrate what could be going on out there.... I don't know what does.
Marguerite
Christina L
Well-known member
I was not chastising you, Ross,
I was not chastising you, Ross,
not in the least. I was just trying to say that those of us who do not feel this lawsuit (Ritter's) is for appropriate reasons, have a right to our opinions. I feel as if people were saying we were heartless and cruel to be "kicking Mrs. Ritter when she is down" and that Mrs. Ritter has a right to "get back" at the physicians who "caused" her husband's death.
Every case is different. I do not believe that all lawsuits are about money or are unnecessary. I think long-term negligence can warrant a lawsuit or poor care from a physician, but more often than not, this is not the reason for lawsuits.
I'm done.
Christina L
I was not chastising you, Ross,
not in the least. I was just trying to say that those of us who do not feel this lawsuit (Ritter's) is for appropriate reasons, have a right to our opinions. I feel as if people were saying we were heartless and cruel to be "kicking Mrs. Ritter when she is down" and that Mrs. Ritter has a right to "get back" at the physicians who "caused" her husband's death.
Every case is different. I do not believe that all lawsuits are about money or are unnecessary. I think long-term negligence can warrant a lawsuit or poor care from a physician, but more often than not, this is not the reason for lawsuits.
I'm done.
Christina L
Christina L
Well-known member
I know I said I was done, but I knew
I know I said I was done, but I knew
there was another situation (I couldn't remember when I posted earlier) regarding a friend of mine that certainly "some" would think warranted a lawsuit but they didn't sue: This was about 10 years ago - her father had bypass surgery - big man - tall and big - not fat - after his surgery, a nurse (who should have asked for help) was helping this gal's father to the restroom. He fainted and fell to the floor because the nurse was unable to hold him up - his wound came open and it caused complications that he died from within a day. No talk of lawsuit and no thought of it. His family accepted it as his time. I'm sure they were angry but mistakes and accidents and misdiagnoses happen all the time in hospitals.
I guess I am just sticking up for the health profession here. No one is perfect. When it is your time to go, it is your time. We all must die. Here is a link to a blog site and there is one very angry ER doctor who posts and a very civil, level-headed doctor who talks about malpractice and he is so eloquent - it is worth reading.
I just think this is a subject that should be looked at - we are a nation of lawyers and lawsuits - we sue for anything and everything. It is sad and everyone suffers. Money IS the root of all evil, as they say.
http://www.kevinmd.com/blog/2004/09/er-thoughts-john-ritter-lawsuits-and.html
Christina L
I know I said I was done, but I knew
there was another situation (I couldn't remember when I posted earlier) regarding a friend of mine that certainly "some" would think warranted a lawsuit but they didn't sue: This was about 10 years ago - her father had bypass surgery - big man - tall and big - not fat - after his surgery, a nurse (who should have asked for help) was helping this gal's father to the restroom. He fainted and fell to the floor because the nurse was unable to hold him up - his wound came open and it caused complications that he died from within a day. No talk of lawsuit and no thought of it. His family accepted it as his time. I'm sure they were angry but mistakes and accidents and misdiagnoses happen all the time in hospitals.
I guess I am just sticking up for the health profession here. No one is perfect. When it is your time to go, it is your time. We all must die. Here is a link to a blog site and there is one very angry ER doctor who posts and a very civil, level-headed doctor who talks about malpractice and he is so eloquent - it is worth reading.
I just think this is a subject that should be looked at - we are a nation of lawyers and lawsuits - we sue for anything and everything. It is sad and everyone suffers. Money IS the root of all evil, as they say.
http://www.kevinmd.com/blog/2004/09/er-thoughts-john-ritter-lawsuits-and.html
Christina L
G
Guest
Christina L said:
Bingo.
But, in this day and age, that is the case.
So, I suppose I should file lawsuits against:
NBC [Why on earth did JR's widow appear on this network, anyway? She certainly could've gone on a more reputable one.] ... at least the station in Chicago, for hiring Jerry Springer for the SOLE purpose of dismantling the #1 news team in Chicago in the 1990s ... and then firing him after only one newscast.
Ch#$r%*et ... for ripping people off since the mid-1980s with cars that aren't what they claim to be. Namely: FWD Ch#$r%*et Corolla/Toyota Nova in the 1980s; Celebrity/Lumina/"monte carlo" 1995-present; Celebrity/Lumina/"impala" 2000-present; Corsica/"malibu" 1997-present.
Tribune Co ... for claiming they want a winning team on the Northside of Chicago (Chicago Cubs, if you don't know your Chicago directions) since they first took ownership in the early 1980s and NOT EVER producing this. Winning team, by THEIR definition, is a World Series win ... NOTHING less. And, unless someone is going to tell me I slept through an entire season, the Cubs have yet to have a winning season (by the Tribune Co's definition) at all....
*pauses*
Now see ... I've just done some public awareness...and haven't sued anyone.
YET.
*shrugs*
I see where JR's widow is coming from ... and it is GOOD that she wants to set up that foundation, etc. BUT ... well, I don't know. It just smells a tiny bit rotten to me, I guess.....
But ... that, of course, comes from someone who doesn't have the money he needs to do all he wants.....and never will.
Cort:34swm."Mr Monte Carlo.Mr Road Trip".pig valve&pacemaker
WRMNshowcase.legos.HO.models.MCs.RTs.CHD = http://www.chevyasylum.com/cort
"Just a little insight won't make this right" ... All-American Rejects ... 'It Ends Tonight'
- Status
