| HN Mirror

>One wonders what profession these people are in.

Both people I'm thinking of were victims of interactions as consumers (of medical services/products), not employees, as it happens.

In one case, the lack of a lucrative career factored directly into the futility of litigation.

In the other, the harm was largely that a medication side effect led to impulsive decisions that undermined a good career and other relationships, and would've been difficult to prove in court.

How do I know this latter was real? Because I coincidentally know there was a massive lawsuit on behalf of victims less ambiguous.

>Also, being in the litigation industry, I'm sure you know that injuring and killing someone is a crime

I am not a lawyer, and I'm not "in the litigation industry" for some years now. However, it's a strange thing to say that injuring or killing someone is always a crime. It's frequently not even a tort. Have you known nobody that's died due to a doctor's mistake? A prescription medication? Seen a "death panel" at a nursing home?

>I'm talking about accidents here.

Sure, and so was I. I mean, you can never really be certain, especially in the many cases that don't get litigated. That's why discovery is a thing, I think. Many, many cases just don't meet cost/benefit criteria and are never filed.

I like repeating this no matter how much I get downvoted each time: medical errors are one of the leading causes of death, behind only one or two like cancer. They are vastly underestimated by most people because there is no diagnostic nor billing code for fuck-ups. Anyone who's worked anywhere near the medical/insurance industry knows how everything revolves around codes, so it had a bitter ring of truth to me when I first read a certain article from Johns Hopkins.