#legal malpractice insurance

[casefoxinc]

Planning Your Next Chapter: A Lawyer’s Guide to Retirement Preparation

Ready to transition from the courtroom to a well-deserved retirement? Our comprehensive guide helps lawyers navigate the journey to retirement with ease. From financial planning and investment strategies to lifestyle adjustments and maintaining a sense of purpose, discover the essential steps to ensure a smooth and fulfilling retirement. Start planning your next chapter today!

[mattersuite]

The Benefits of Legal Malpractice Insurance for Lawyers

Lawsuits can happen to anyone, even the best lawyers and attorneys. Legal malpractice insurance provides critical protection for your practice. Explore the benefits, from safeguarding assets to upholding client trust. Learn how to choose the right policy and avoid common pitfalls. Get insured, get empowered to focus on what matters: your clients.

[llyrarg]

shouldn't you see a doctor about that or something

lmao this guy thinks i can go to the doctor

[timhauritz]

Why Attorney Malpractice Insurance Is Crucial for Every Legal Professional

In the world of law, attorneys carry a substantial amount of responsibility. From providing legal advice to representing clients in court, legal professionals hold their clients' futures in their hands. However, even the most skilled and diligent attorneys can face unexpected situations where their actions or advice may result in allegations of malpractice. To protect themselves and their practice, attorneys should consider the importance of securing attorney malpractice insurance.

This article explains why such insurance is essential for legal professionals and how it can safeguard their career and financial wellbeing.

Understanding Attorney Malpractice Insurance

Attorney malpractice insurance is a specialized type of professional liability insurance designed to protect legal professionals from financial losses arising from lawsuits filed by clients for errors, omissions, or negligence. Legal professionals, like other professionals, can be held accountable for mistakes made during the course of their work, and these lawsuits can lead to significant financial burdens. Malpractice insurance serves as a shield, helping attorneys cover the costs of legal defense and any settlements or judgments that may arise.

For lawyers, the risk of being accused of malpractice is always present. Clients may sue for a variety of reasons, such as failing to meet deadlines, providing inadequate legal advice, or mishandling a case. Even if the attorney is ultimately found not at fault, the costs of defending a lawsuit can be overwhelming. Attorney malpractice insurance provides the financial safety net needed to handle these situations without jeopardizing the attorney's career or practice.

The Legal Environment and Risk of Malpractice

The legal profession is inherently fraught with risks. Attorneys handle complex cases that involve strict deadlines, intricate legal principles, and high-stakes outcomes for their clients. In the high-pressure world of law, even small mistakes can have catastrophic consequences, leading to claims of malpractice.

Malpractice can occur due to various reasons:

Negligence: An attorney may fail to act on time or miss critical deadlines that affect the outcome of a case.

Conflict of Interest: Attorneys may inadvertently represent clients with conflicting interests, which can lead to malpractice claims.

Breach of Confidentiality: Mishandling sensitive client information can result in serious legal consequences.

Errors in Legal Strategy: An attorney's legal strategies or advice may fail, causing clients to suffer harm.

Given the nature of the work, the legal industry is particularly vulnerable to lawsuits. Without attorney malpractice insurance, legal professionals may find themselves facing the full financial burden of defending against a lawsuit and paying for any potential damages, which can easily exceed their personal and professional savings.

The Financial Implications of Attorney Malpractice

The financial ramifications of an attorney malpractice claim can be dire. Legal fees, court costs, and the potential for substantial settlement payouts can drain the attorney's resources. In some cases, a malpractice claim can be so financially devastating that it leads to the closure of a practice.

Without adequate malpractice insurance, the attorney may be forced to pay for legal defense and settlements out of pocket. This can lead to significant personal financial hardship, and in severe cases, attorneys may even face bankruptcy. Attorney malpractice insurance can help alleviate these risks by covering the costs associated with defending against claims, and it can also provide coverage for any judgments or settlements that may arise.

Protecting Reputation and Career

An attorney's reputation is critical to their success. Malpractice claims can severely damage an attorney's reputation, regardless of whether they are ultimately found at fault. The mere accusation of malpractice can create doubt in the minds of potential clients and harm the attorney's ability to attract new business.

With attorney malpractice insurance, legal professionals can protect their reputation. Insured attorneys are better positioned to handle claims without allowing the issue to escalate into a major career setback. Additionally, many insurance providers offer services that can assist in managing public relations and mitigating reputational damage, which is especially important in a profession where trust and credibility are paramount.

The Peace of Mind Provided by Attorney Malpractice Insurance

One of the most valuable aspects of attorney malpractice insurance is the peace of mind it provides. Knowing that they are covered in the event of an accusation or lawsuit allows legal professionals to focus on what they do best—providing excellent legal services to their clients. Rather than worrying about the financial and reputational implications of a malpractice claim, attorneys can concentrate on their work, knowing they have the protection they need.

Moreover, many insurance providers offer risk management tools to help attorneys minimize the likelihood of facing a malpractice claim. These tools can include training, templates, and resources designed to ensure attorneys meet the highest professional standards.

Tailoring Insurance Coverage to Specific Needs

Attorney malpractice insurance is not a one-size-fits-all product. Legal professionals have different needs depending on their area of practice, the size of their firm, and the specific risks they face. For example, a solo practitioner may require different coverage than a large law firm with multiple attorneys.

Most insurance providers offer customizable policies that allow attorneys to select the coverage that best suits their needs. Attorneys should carefully assess their practice and consider the potential risks they face to ensure they have adequate coverage.

How Attorney Malpractice Insurance Supports Professional Ethics

Maintaining high ethical standards is a cornerstone of the legal profession. Having attorney malpractice insurance demonstrates a commitment to upholding these standards and provides clients with confidence in an attorney’s ability to handle their legal matters responsibly.

Malpractice insurance is not only a financial safeguard but also an ethical one. It reflects an attorney's dedication to managing their professional responsibilities with care and diligence. By ensuring that they are adequately covered, attorneys show that they take their legal obligations seriously and are prepared for any unforeseen circumstances.

The Value of Choosing a Reliable Provider

When selecting attorney malpractice insurance, it is crucial to partner with a reliable insurance provider. An experienced provider will offer tailored coverage, responsive customer service, and a deep understanding of the legal profession’s unique needs. It is important to choose a provider with a track record of serving legal professionals, as they will be able to offer the most effective and comprehensive protection.

In conclusion, attorney malpractice insurance is a critical component of any legal practice. It provides financial protection, mitigates reputational risks, and ensures that attorneys can focus on their work without the constant worry of potential malpractice claims. Every legal professional, regardless of their practice size or specialty, should consider securing this essential insurance.

For attorneys seeking reliable malpractice insurance, Advanced Professional Services offers comprehensive coverage options tailored to meet the needs of legal professionals. With years of experience and a strong reputation, they are an excellent choice for attorneys looking to protect their practice and their future.

[attorneysfirst]

Shielding Excellence: The Vital Role of Law Firm Malpractice Insurance

In the ever-evolving landscape of legal practice, law firms shoulder immense responsibilities while navigating intricate legal matters. However, the risk of facing malpractice claims is an inherent aspect of the profession, emphasizing the crucial need for Law Firm Malpractice Insurance.

Understanding Law Firm Malpractice Insurance

Law Firm Malpractice Insurance, a specialized form of professional liability coverage, is designed to safeguard law firms from the financial repercussions of legal malpractice claims. These claims can arise from various scenarios, including errors, omissions, or negligence in providing legal services. This insurance is an essential tool for risk management, ensuring that law firms can continue their operations even in the face of unforeseen challenges.

Comprehensive Coverage Features

Professional Liability Protection: The core of Law Firm Malpractice Insurance is professional liability coverage, offering financial protection in the event of claims related to errors, omissions, or negligent acts during legal representation.

Legal Defense Costs: Malpractice claims often lead to extensive legal expenses. This insurance covers the costs associated with defending the law firm against such claims, allowing firms to mount a robust defense without compromising their financial stability.

Settlements and Judgments: In instances where a malpractice claim results in a settlement or judgment, the insurance steps in to cover these financial obligations, preventing severe economic setbacks for the law firm.

Extended Reporting Period (ERP): Law Firm Malpractice Insurance typically includes an Extended Reporting Period, commonly known as "tail coverage." This feature enables the reporting of claims even after the policy expires, provided the incident occurred during the policy period.

Importance for Law Firms

For law firms of all sizes, from boutique practices to large multinational entities, Malpractice Insurance is a critical aspect of risk management. The nature of collaborative efforts within a firm and the potential for multiple attorneys working on a case heighten the importance of having a comprehensive insurance policy. It not only protects the firm's financial health but also upholds its professional reputation.

Conclusion

In the dynamic and challenging field of legal practice, law firms must proactively manage the risks associated with professional liability. Attorneys First Insurance stands as a bulwark against potential financial crises, ensuring that legal professionals can focus on delivering exceptional services without the constant specter of malpractice claims. It is not merely a safeguard; it is an indispensable investment in preserving the excellence and longevity of a law firm's reputation and success in the legal arena.

[qualityloveparadise]

Injury attorney san Antonio, USA 2023

An injury attorney in San Antonio, USA is a legal professional who specializes in handling cases related to personal injury. Personal injury cases can involve a variety of accidents or incidents, such as car accidents, workplace accidents, slip and fall accidents, medical malpractice, and more. The primary role of an injury attorney is to represent their clients in court and negotiate on their…

[lucyoccupy]

Is Your Insurance Claim Being Mishandled? Ask ChatGPT About the Worst Lawyer Conduct in America!

“Is Your Lawyer Playing Fair? Find Out the Worst Insurance Claim Conduct in America with ChatGPT!” “Is Your Insurance Company Treating You Unfairly? Discover the Shocking Truth About Lawyer Misconduct in America!” “Lawyers Gone Bad: The Shocking Truth About Insurance Claims!” “Find out the shocking truth: What some insurance lawyers do that they don’t want you to know!” SEE LINKEDIN POLL:   …

[gatorpond]

i hate to do this, but i need help again. my brother died in late may & i've been struggling since to eat, sleep, or take care of myself. i have a work backlog & was unable to do my physical therapy so my pain is slowing me even more. if anyone has the ability/feels like donating, my kofi is here. shares are super appreciated.

y'all have helped me so much & i can't thank you enough. i really can't. i don't know how to even put that into words. i don't have much of an irl support system and y'all have literally saved my life during this time. i wish i could function better so i could stop needing help. at this point, i've lost weight, have been too dissociated to function, and have been set back months of work on my physical therapy. my disabilities are back in full force. i struggle to remember to take my meds. i sat in my chair and didn't move for 6 straight hrs yesterday. i've also been spending much of my time helping my mom sort thru medical records/legal paperwork. i don't want to reveal too many details publicly, but his death was. traumatic & potential medical malpractice. i cannot overstate how hard this has all been. i'm not trying to twist ppl's emotions to send me help; i just want to be very clear what my situation is. i'm applying for food assistance again (was rejected last time) but for housing, utilities, insurance, medications, there's no assistance in my state. i have to have funds. all of that to say: i'm sorry to have to keep leaning on y'all so hard. i'm trying to get my feet under me, i swear. but i still can't seem to manage it. this shattered my world. i hate that i need to worry abt finances at all right now. thank y'all for any help. and for those who have been so patient with me wrt comms & owed art: i cannot say thank you enough. y'all have been so understanding. i'm working on your pieces as much as possible, i promise. if you have questions, my dms are open. you can contact me thru email/telegram too.

[alpaca-clouds]

I learned an important lesson yesterday: Lawyers are fucking magic. They wave their "make your problems go away" stick and your problems go away.

It turns out that the family of one of my work colleagues entirely works in medical law. So, I talked with them on the phone yesterday. And in the end his dad called the hospital yesterday in the afternoon. And he was just like: "Gentle reminder: Not treating your patients is in fact illegal. If it turns out your diagnosis is wrong and you hence treated it wrongly, there is no fault. But if you have a diagnosis and do not treat it, that is actually malpractice. Do you need this in writing or will this phone call surfice?" And I kid you not, 15 minutes later I finally got the corticoids I have been trying to get for 8 fucking weeks.

Moral of the story: I will get myself legal insurance now. Because it allows me the ability to go: "I will call my lawyer."

In Germany there is the saying: "There is a difference between having a legal right and being able to use a legal right." And I am afraid this difference is called having a fucking lawyer.

And given how many times some companies already pulled shit like: "You gotta pay XYZ" because they know that a lot of people will simply pay up... Yeah... I so far always took myself a lawyer, who then just replied: "No, I do not think my client will pay that." To which the companies would always react with: "Oh. Okay. I guess."

There was a case once where one of my phone providers suddenly came out of nowhere like: "Oh, you did not properly end our contract with us. Now pay up 3000€ for the last three years." And I had the presence of mind to just go to a lawyer. And the lawyer was like: "I do not think my client will pay it. But we will be kind and pay for six months, which would be 120€." And the phone provider was liek: "Oh. Oh. Yeah. Uhm... That is fair."

[am-i-the-asshole-official]

WIBTA for reporting my previous place of employment for shady work practices?

Disclaimer: this would be strictly petty revenge for firing me - while illegal, technically, the malpractice doesn't harm anyone.

This might get a little long.

Backstory:

I worked a receptionist position at a family-owned funeral home (in the US) where recently, the managing funeral director was replaced from a highly respected individual by a couple from a different state that had come out of retirement and were completely changing everything - some for the better, most to their liking... and some that while legal in their home state isn't allowed in the current state we are.

I had a strong feeling out the gate that the person out of the two that would end up becoming my direct supervisor didn't like any of the current staff, which got solidified when during a meeting she pretty much stated it would be her way or the highway.

Sometimes when we're slammed, we all work through our lunch and don't get a break for 8+ hours at all, so instead of forgoing eating altogether the entire staff got used to just scarfing down their food super fast at their desks.

We also don't have company cellphones, we only have landlines, and the way we dispatch our team to go pick someone up after they pass is to call the person to make sure they're available, and then text them the needed info (we also don't get a stipend to offset our cell bills).

Dilemma:

Tuesday morning, I got fired due to "gross insubordination" for a. eating at my desk and b. using my cellphone to call the dispatch team. The owner himself fired me, and was pretty rude and, imo, pretty heartless about it (due to some events that occurred on Sunday, I had to call out of work Monday, and when I asked if I should prep myself for the meeting since I had a rough weekend, he responded with "well, it's about to get worse").

He already had my final check in hand (which had a copy of my timesheet with the days that I skipped lunch marked as "busy" or "no lunch cover") along with a termination letter, so he didn't even care to hear my side of the story.

Since I was the receptionist, I've got receipts on some, if not most, of the slightly shady things that they were doing (i.e. selling insurance without a license, selling insurance under a different identity, breaking some state statutes from false advertising, etc etc), and was thinking about reporting them to the necessary agencies.

Its possible that this could lead to the place getting shut down (i dont doubt that the fines would definitely add up) and leave people without work (which is my main deterrent but out of everyone that works there, only a few of the original staff is still there - the rest have either quit or are actively looking), but at the same time, if they continue unchecked they're gonna keep getting away with it, keep making bank, and with the state we're in being a right to work state, as long as they can frame it a certain way, they can use anything at all to fire someone.

So... WIBTA if I went through the proper channels to report them for their malpractice and have them audited?

What are these acronyms?

[sysmedsaresexist]

So have you talked about Colin Ross abusing and traumatizing his patients, or him believing he can shoot beams of energy out of his eyeballs, or any of that stuff or did i miss those posts or what

I did :) keep looking, I'm sure you're almost there

In all seriousness, no one is saying he's a saint or unproblematic, but him believing he can shoot lasers doesn't exactly affect the results of fmris or the readings of other clinicians in the studies compiling results

I mean, unless he shot the lasers right into the machine

That might skew the results a bit

But if you're going to dismiss Ross, you also have to dismiss van der Hart, Braun (RIP???), Poznanski, and all of the other psychotherapy clinicians involved in 15-20% of yearly medical malpractice lawsuits (statistics in these areas are horrible to wade through).

Malpractice lawsuits are a fact of life in the medical field and that's why every doctor is legally required to have insurance. It's estimated that by the age of 65 years, 75% of physicians in low-risk specialties had faced a malpractice claim (this includes psychiatry), as compared with 99% of physicians in high-risk specialties (surgeons and the like). At least 10% of an average 40 year career is spent with an open lawsuit on file. 96% of medical malpractice cases are settled out of court, without you ever knowing they happened. Your family/general doctor has more than likely been sued before, and you have zero idea. Of the cases that go to court, over 55% are dismissed. Of the remainder, over 70% are awarded to the physician. These numbers are terrifying. Not only are the number of frivolous lawsuits incredibly high, the fact that so few cases are won by the patient is just depressing.

Based on the above, like 1 case out of roughly 3,500 yearly malpractice suits against therapists will succeed in court.

(The above numbers are US based)

To reiterate, over half of those cases never go to court and you don't know they happened, because at that point, insurance companies prefer to just make things go away with money, whether it's valid or not.

How many can't afford to sue?

These cases range from therapists oversharing, bad note taking, confidentiality concerns, sexual relationships, business relationships, misdiagnosis, prescription management, lack of training in techniques, disagreements, and any number of other things. More often than not, malpractice suits aren't for emotional damage, but procedural and ethical issues.

The more well-known you are, the harder the cases you take, the more likely you are to be sued. I don't actually know of a case where Ross was the sole named physician, usually there's 3 or 4 named and Ross has only made it to the settlement stage once, though we can't see what part he played or if he was held responsible over the other physicians. I don't think he was ever named as the primary physician, meaning he came into these cases after another doctor had made the diagnosis.

How would you feel if every doctor decided to reassess you themselves rather than trust another diagnosing physician? This is a real question that matters. It's not rhetorical. I'm not defending Ross, either, but I'd be pretty frustrated by the third round of testing. Multiple diagnosing clinicians just isn't always feasible, and yes, it leads to errors. But that's not just psychiatry.

I don't really know what to say to this ask. No one is denying he's got problems, but can those problems be directly tied to the research and did they skew results? Where do we draw the line to decide who's officially useless as a clinician (people like Hart) and who's just getting sued in a normal daily event?

Can we talk about the laser beam thing for a second, though?

Colin Ross has an eyebeam of energy he'd like you to hear

Ross applied to the James Randi Educational Foundation’s One Million Dollar Paranormal Challenge

Ross's basic claim is that with the aid of special goggles he’s assembled using a blue Aqua Sphere swim mask, electrical wiring and, naturally, scraps of tin foil, he can harness the energy from his eyes and use the energy to play a tone on a computer. He describes it like an on-off switch. And he plans to use the technology he’ll develop to add receptors to such devices as iPods and light switches, allowing folks to turn them on or off using our eyebeams.

He won an award. A Pigasus. I think this is hilarious.

The Pigasus Award is given each year, “To the scientist or academic who said or did the silliest thing related to the supernatural, paranormal or occult.” Dr. Ross’ 2009 Pigasus Award stems from his ability to focus his own electromagnetic field to send a beam of energy from his eyes and make a tone sound out of a speaker. He has applied to the One Million Dollar Paranormal Challenge administered by the JREF.

The JREF has ridiculed Dr. Ross since he filed his challenge application. James Randi wrote on his web page: “You think you’ve seen every sort of claim that could be thrown at the JREF…. Most have been preposterous, silly, irrational, and/or astonishing. Now we have one that is all of those…Dr. Colin A. Ross.”

“I am not the first unconventional thinker who has had to endure the snickering of cynics and skeptics, so I happily accept this recognition,” said Dr. Ross. “Every significant scientific advance faces resistance, but it is time that the JREF stop ridiculing me and tests the protocol.”

I don't know where I'm going with all this, it's just food for thought, context. Nothing is ever quite so black and white, even eye lasers, and sometimes you keep the bathwater and toss the evil baby.

It's hard, it's a balance. Do we say you can't trust the ToSD because of Hart? Can bad people still make reliable resources? As much as it sucks, I think some research is still valuable, and we need to teach people how to critically examine methods and conclusions to decide if the research has merit, not just decide based on whose name is first in the authors list.

[dreaminginthedeepsouth]

12/4/2024- Transfer of Power :: Clay Bennett

* * * *

Governing is hard . . . as Trump is about to find out

December 10, 2024

Robert B. Hubbell

I am circling back to events that occurred late last week and over the weekend. Others have discussed these developments fully, especially Donald Trump's first “sit down” interview as president-elect. See, for example, Jay Kuo on Substack, Status Kuo, The Interview. I recommend Jay Kuo’s article for a detailed analysis of Trump's lies during his first formal interview as president-elect.

As Kuo describes in his essay, Trump touched on five major topics:

He vowed to end birthright citizenship under the US Constitution.

He is still exploring “concepts of a plan” to replace the Affordable Care Act;

He acknowledged that his threatened tariffs might contribute to inflation;

He threatened the January 6 Committee members with imprisonment while pledging to pardon January 6 insurrectionists;

He threatened to “send them all back,” referring to ten million immigrants whom he believes are subject to immediate detention and deportation.

Trump's threats outlined above will cause tens of millions of Americans to experience fear and anxiety and will inflict financial and emotional hardship on innocent family members. While that damage must never be minimized, we must also recognize that Trump's threats--collectively and individually—portend a disastrous start to his second term.

If he is stupid enough to follow through on his threats (and he is), they will provide Democrats, Independents, and shell-shocked Republicans with a common platform to resist and obstruct Trump's agenda, and punish his party.

Although NBC published a post-interview fact check and Kristen Welker pushed back against many of Trump’s falsehoods, Welker and NBC gave Trump plenty of airtime to repeat his outrageous lies.

Giving Trump that platform is journalistic malpractice—one that the major networks and cable outlets commit again and again. Readers sent me several dozen copies of David Pepper’s criticisms of the NBC interview: See Pepperspectives (on Substack), Platforming Disinformation - by David Pepper.

David Pepper prescribes the only rational approach to interviewing Trump (an approach not followed by Kristen Welker):

I’ll re-make the simple suggestion I made [when NBC interviewed Trump over a year ago]: Never move on from the FIRST lie until Trump acknowledges it’s a lie. NEVER. Literally….end the interview rather than moving onto the next topic. Why does this matter? Because Trump and other dishonest subjects go into these interviews KNOWING they can get away with endless lying, for two reasons. First, in many cases, most of the lies are not even fact-checked. Second, even if they are fact checked, the liar KNOWS that the interviewer’s goal is to get through a long list of questions. That list of questions, more than truth itself, becomes the goal of the interview.

David Pepper is absolutely correct! Unless journalists are willing to do the real work of holding Trump accountable for his lies, they are providing a platform for those lies.

Back to my thesis: Each of Trump's threats mentioned during the NBC interview will sow the seeds of MAGA’s defeat. For example, Trump wrongly claims that he can “end” birthright citizenship—a right explicitly guaranteed in the 14th Amendment. His proposal has been met with derision and scorn by legal scholars, who have described Trump's theory as a “lunatic fringe argument” and akin to believing in “unicorns.”

But that won’t stop Trump from issuing an unconstitutional executive order that will immediately cloud the status of legal residency, employment, Social Security benefits, healthcare, and unemployment insurance for tens of millions of Americans. Many millions of those American citizens likely voted for Trump in the mistaken belief that his lunacy would be directed at other people.

Trump intentionally ratcheted up the fear factor by saying that his termination of birthright citizenship should not “break up families.” Instead, Trump proposes to deport everyone in the family in which only some members have birthright citizenship.

Deportation based on “guilt by association” is extraordinarily unlikely to happen, but it did not stop Trump from making the threat during the interview and frightening millions of American families in which some, but not all, of the family members are US citizens by birth.

The same cruelty is embedded in Trump's massive deportation plan, which he has previously acknowledged will sweep in US citizens or legal residents entitled to remain in the US.

Even Trump knows he went too far in his interview bombast. He was forced to acknowledge during the interview that his tariffs “might” contribute to inflation—a statement that is as close as Trump ever comes to an admission that he is wrong.

Moreover, on Monday, a Trump spokesperson went further in attempting to “walk back” one of Trump's statements about jailing members of the January 6 Committee. The unusual move by Trump came after some of Trump's stalwart allies in the legal world blasted Trump for claiming that members of the January 6 Committee should be imprisoned.

Jonathan Turley, a law professor at George Washington School of Law and a frequent defender of Trump during impeachment hearings, said the following on Fox “news”:

The fact, however, is that there is no viable criminal case to be made against the J6 Committee members for their investigation or report. We need to move beyond the rage rhetoric if this country is going to come together to face the tough challenges ahead.

Trump spokesperson Jason Miller tried to dispute the clear implication of Trump's threat against the J6 Committee members by saying that Trump only wants “the law to be applied equally to everyone” and that the decision would be left up to law enforcement officials, including Kash Patel.

Of course, Jason Miller did not acknowledge that Kash Patel (nominee for FBI) has a political enemies list that includes every prominent member of the January 6 Committee.

If Trump follows through with his threat to pursue that January 6 Committee, his effort will crash and burn—even if it makes its way to the compromised and corrupt Roberts’ reactionary majority. The work of the January 6 Committee is absolutely protected by the Speech and Debate Clause of the US Constitution.

Finally, Trump's pledge to pardon the January 6 insurrectionists is a lose-lose proposition for Trump. If he pardons all of them (unlikely) he will pardon dozens of insurrectionists who attacked and inflicted serious injuries on dozens of law enforcement officers. If Trump pardons fewer than all of the insurrectionists, he will be viewed as having broken his promise and betrayed his most violent supporters among the January 6 mob. As I said, lose, lose.

Here's my point: Trump is in the “talking tough, consequence free” portion of his post-election fantasy tour. As soon as he attempts to act on any of his anti-democratic, “lunatic fringe,” family-busting threats, the consequences of his cruelty will dominate the airwaves non-stop. And that will horrify Americans and weaken Trump politically.

I expect that many readers will disagree with my analysis. But the Trump team has already seen this train coming down the tracks, which is why Jason Miller has started to walk-back some of Trump's comments and Trump has himself acknowledged that tariffs will raise prices in the US.

I believe that Trump has overplayed his hand. Yes, he will carry through with some of his threats and will inflict pain on millions of Americans. That tragic state of affairs will be our opening to convince the majority of Americans that Trump and his party of enablers are toxic to democracy.

[Robert B. Hubbell]

[insipid-drivel]

My Surgeon Ghosted Me For Having A Panic Attack

My surgeon ghosted me, devastated me and my family, and I only found out through their legal representative 2 weeks before a surgery I've been begging and waiting for almost 20 years for.

I'm a 32-year-old trans person with PTSD and a very, very rare mental condition called DDNOS-1B. Since I was 13 years old, I've been fighting for a hysterectomy both for my gender identity, and to cure a horrendously painful and life-threatening condition called Menorrhagia that causes me extreme agony and to spontaneously hemorrhage when I menstruate. I've been hanging on to life by my fingernails, and my own surgeon just stomped on my hands.

Today, with just 2 weeks before my surgery date and my insurance approving of everything, I received a call from my OBGYN's legal representation accusing ME, the patient, of accusing my OBGYN of assaulting me when I had a panic attack during a routine pelvic examination so my insurance would cover most of the medical bills of my surgery.

While I was panicked, I partially dissociated and one of my male alter personalities - who I had already told my OBGYN about in appointments before the examination - experienced the examination with me. In addition to having been assaulted by a previous doctor during pelvic examination years before, I'm trans, and the alter personality that manifested is staunchly male and found the sensation of the examination alarming. While trying to calm down from a panic attack and gain control of myself again when the pelvic exam was over, I followed my therapist's guidance to verbalize my emotions when I felt my trauma manifesting again, and said, "That felt violating," to myself without really thinking. I was on Valium specifically for the examination due to the severity of my trauma, but still panicked enough that I babbled the words without thinking, and asked to please be allowed to go home if my OBGYN had gotten everything they needed from the appointment.

My OBGYN confirmed they'd gotten what they needed, said, "I only want to help you," while I nodded and could only stare at the floor and tremble while I gathered my things to leave. My ears were ringing. I was fighting tears and hyperventilation. It was a normal pelvic exam, but they just happen to be triggering for me because of my past trauma. When I'm that stressed, I become functionally mute and can't speak at all if I can't relax. It took me 3 days to fully relax after my OBGYN's examination, but in no way did I feel like they had behaved inappropriately or been too rough or forceful with me. It was just an experience and sensation I don't tolerate well without re-experiencing my past trauma. I wanted to go home, recover psychologically from an odious and frustrating panic disorder, and prepare for the surgery that, I hoped, would make my quality of life better than it's ever been.

I was not aware that I had to be responsible for my doctor's feelings when I was the patient in distress, and now feel that there is no way for me to receive the surgery I need unless I can magically do it without showing any fear or trepidation that could be misinterpreted by medical professionals and send them running to their lawyers for instructions.

Today, I received a phone call from my OBGYN's legal representative, just 2 weeks away from my surgery, announcing that my OBGYN had canceled the appointment and come running to them with fears that I would file a malpractice suit. I was forced to write a humiliating apology letter to my OBGYN's legal representation trying to set the record straight - that I hadn't accused my OBGYN of anything and thought they provided me with the best care they could, and it was my own reaction from pre-existing trauma that had been witnessed. Nevertheless, I could not have felt more betrayed, embarrassed, or shattered. I've needed a basic hysterectomy since I was 13 years old and have spent my entire reproductive life begging doctors and surgeons to please perform it, but have been refused every time because of my age, my gender, and/or the fact that I hadn't had any children myself and "would change my mind" as I got older.

I never changed my mind about having children. I don't want to, because I am trans, and my body needs work done on it before I can feel truly like I'm comfortable in my own skin. Now, I don't think that will ever happen.

I'm writing to different news outlets and here because it is absolutely unconscionable that a licensed medical doctor could tell me to my face that my dream since age 13 of being pain-free and living with a body that feels normal was going to be realized… only to send their legal representation 2 weeks before the date to tell me that, because I panicked and babbled the wrong thing TO MYSELF that the doctor found threatening to their job security, my dream was gone. It would've taken just one question, "Are you okay?" from my OBGYN to clear up the direction my babbled words were aimed in, but instead, they assumed I was accusing them of something horrendous, and terminated my care without bothering to tell me why, or that they were going to do it at all.

My family is absolutely devastated. I'm devastated to the point that I just feel numb. My mother has been inconsolable, as she's nearing 70, can't retire, and has been my only caregiver for most of my life because of the severity of my disabling pain caused by a part of my body that, as a trans person, every fiber of my being screams isn't supposed to exist. I feel deeply discriminated against, and like we now live in a state where, regardless of how distressed you are as a patient, you must perform to a certain standard to receive the attention and dedication of your own doctors. You're allowed to be traumatized and struggle with it, but only so long as your doctor feels completely exempt from what triggers you, and that you have to shut up and take any procedure you're required to endure for further care without showing any fear or pain.

Is this really the case? Are our doctors getting so scared of their own shadows that people like me can have their care terminated on the grounds of Not Being Brave Enough? I thought that I was safe to be trans and seek gender affirming AND medically necessary care without discrimination by medical professionals in Washington - my birthplace and the only place I've ever really called home - but now I feel like there's nowhere I can go to receive the care I need, and would be better served if I waited until I developed a terminal illness and used my right to Death With Dignity to end my life on my terms than bother to go to the doctor again for preventative care and regular checkups. What's the point? If I have one panic attack and say the wrong thing trying to comfort myself, I'll lose my doctor completely.

Why is it taking almost 20 years or more for a single doctor in Washington State to perform a hysterectomy on a desperately, desperately willing patient that also medically needs it? What is going on? Do all transgender Washingtonians deal with this level of discrimination and hand-wringing from their doctors? If I weren't trans, or didn't have DID, would I finally receive the care I need? Or is it really a matter of having to be the emotional support for your doctor in order for them to feel cushioned and safe enough to do an effective job in caring for you without them getting spooked and clutching their licenses like they're a breath away from being revoked?

Why am I, a disabled layperson on SSI that can barely even get out of bed most days, forced to be emotionally responsible for my doctor's sense of job security when I'm the one coming to them for help? It's been 20 years, and all I need is a hysterectomy! Not a single surgeon in 20 years will help me, my family has been destroyed by this, and I don't know what to do anymore but cry for help from the press and public to shed light on what is, at least in my experience, an increasingly broken, dysfunctional system that I fear is going to get me, and people like me, killed.

My state should be better than this. For how proudly my state's representatives boast about Washington being a shelter state for women and LGBTQIA+ people fleeing other states, why won't anybody help me? Have I been secretly blacklisted somehow from receiving the care I need? How is it that our doctors can just ghost us while accusing us of POTENTIALLY taking legal action against them? And why on god's green earth was I spoken to as though I was a criminal that had just been stopped from committing a crime and forced to apologize?

Just… what the hell? If this isn't worthy of a little attention from the journalists in my state, I don't know what is. I need help. I need surgery. But I can't even so much as show a little fear - much less talk myself through a panic attack - without my own doctor dropping me as their patient after promising me that the surgery I needed was going to happen. How can a patient even address this? Who do you call when you can't find a doctor because you're too traumatized to make your doctor feel secure in doing their job?

I want to live, my family is suffering, but I can't find a single surgeon that will help me. Is it this bad for everyone?

[timhauritz]

Why Every Attorney Needs Malpractice Insurance: A Comprehensive Guide

In the legal profession, the stakes are high. Attorneys navigate complex laws, advocate for their clients, and make decisions that can profoundly impact lives. With this level of responsibility comes potential risk, making malpractice insurance an essential tool for legal practitioners.

This article explores the importance of attorney malpractice insurance, the types of coverage available, and key considerations when selecting a policy.

Understanding Malpractice Insurance for Attorneys

Malpractice insurance, also known as professional liability insurance, protects attorneys against claims of negligence, errors, or omissions that occur in the course of providing legal services. This type of insurance is vital for lawyers at all stages of their careers, from new associates to seasoned practitioners.

The Importance of Malpractice Insurance

Financial Protection: Legal claims can be costly, involving legal fees, court costs, and potential settlements or judgments. Malpractice insurance provides financial protection, allowing attorneys to defend themselves without facing crippling expenses.

Professional Reputation: A malpractice claim can tarnish an attorney's reputation. With malpractice insurance, attorneys can manage claims effectively, demonstrating professionalism and commitment to addressing any issues that arise.

Client Trust: Clients often seek attorneys who carry malpractice insurance, as it signifies a level of professionalism and accountability. Having insurance can help build trust and confidence in an attorney's services.

Types of Malpractice Insurance Coverage

When it comes to malpractice insurance, attorneys have various options to consider. Understanding these types can help legal professionals make informed decisions about their coverage needs.

1. Occurrence-Based Policies

Occurrence-based policies cover incidents that occur during the policy period, regardless of when a claim is filed. This means that if an attorney provides a service during the policy term and a claim is made years later, they are still covered. This type of policy is often preferred for its long-term security.

2. Claims-Made Policies

Claims-made policies only provide coverage for claims made during the active policy period. If an attorney changes providers or stops practicing, they may need to purchase tail coverage to remain protected against claims that arise after their policy ends. While claims-made policies can be more affordable initially, they require careful management to ensure continuous coverage.

Factors Influencing Malpractice Insurance Costs

Several factors affect the cost of malpractice insurance for attorneys, and understanding these can help them choose the right policy.

1. Geographic Location

The location in which an attorney practices plays a significant role in determining insurance costs. Areas with higher populations or more litigious environments typically see higher premiums. For instance, attorneys practicing in major urban centers may face steeper rates than those in rural areas.

2. Area of Practice

The specific area of law an attorney specializes in can also influence costs. Attorneys practicing in high-risk areas, such as criminal law or personal injury, may pay higher premiums due to the increased likelihood of claims. In contrast, those in lower-risk areas, such as estate planning, may find their rates more manageable.

3. Claims History

An attorney's claims history is a critical factor in determining their insurance rates. A history of claims can lead to higher premiums, while a clean record may result in lower rates. Maintaining high standards of practice and thorough documentation can help prevent claims and keep costs down.

4. Coverage Limits

Malpractice insurance policies come with different coverage limits. Higher limits offer more extensive protection but also come with higher premiums. Attorneys must assess their specific needs and the potential risks associated with their practice to determine the appropriate level of coverage.

Tips for Reducing Malpractice Insurance Costs

Attorneys can take several steps to manage and potentially reduce their malpractice insurance costs.

1. Shop Around

Comparing quotes from multiple insurance providers is essential. Different companies may offer varying rates for similar coverage, so it pays to explore options.

2. Maintain a Clean Record

Practicing with diligence and maintaining thorough documentation can help prevent claims. A clean record not only protects clients but also helps keep insurance premiums lower.

3. Consider Group Insurance

Joining a professional organization or group can provide access to discounted insurance rates. Many organizations offer group malpractice insurance plans that can be more affordable than individual policies.

4. Engage in Continuing Education

Staying current with best practices and legal requirements through ongoing education can reduce the likelihood of claims. Many insurers offer discounts to attorneys who complete recognized training programs.

Conclusion

In a profession marked by high stakes and significant responsibility, malpractice insurance is not just an option for attorneys; it is a necessity. By understanding the types of coverage available and the factors that influence costs, attorneys can make informed decisions to protect their practice and their clients. Investing in adequate malpractice insurance not only safeguards their professional future but also enhances their credibility within the legal community.

For personalized assistance in navigating the complexities of malpractice insurance, attorneys can reach out to Advanced Professional Services to ensure they have the coverage they need to practice confidently.

[justinspoliticalcorner]

Erin Reed at Erin In The Morning:

On Tuesday, Gov. Janet Mills of Maine signed LD 227, a sanctuary bill that protects transgender and abortion providers and patients from out-of-state prosecution, into law. With this action, Maine becomes the 16th state to explicitly protect transgender and abortion care in state law from prosecution. This follows several bomb threats targeting state legislators after social media attacks from far-right anti-trans influencers such as Riley Gaines and Chaya Raichik of Libs of TikTok. An earlier version of the bill failed in committee after similar attacks in January. Undeterred, Democrats reconvened and added additional protections to the bill before it was passed into law.

The law is extensive. It asserts that gender-affirming care and reproductive health care are "legal rights" in Maine. It states that criminal and civil actions against providers and patients are not enforceable if the provision or access to that care occurred within Maine’s borders, asserting jurisdiction over those matters. It bars cooperation with out-of-state subpoenas and arrest warrants for gender-affirming care and abortion that happen within the state. It even protects doctors who provide gender-affirming care and abortion from certain adverse actions by medical boards, malpractice insurance, and other regulating entities, shielding those providers from attempts to economically harm them through out-of-state legislation designed to dissuade them from providing care.

The bill also explicitly enshrines the World Professional Association of Transgender Health’s Standards of Care, which have been the target of right-wing disinformation campaigns, into state law for the coverage of transgender healthcare.

The bill is said to be necessary due to attempts to prosecute doctors and seek information from patients across state lines. In recent months, attorneys general in other states have attempted to obtain health care data on transgender patients who traveled to obtain care. According to the United States Senate Finance Committee, attorneys general in Tennessee, Indiana, Missouri, and Texas attempted to obtain detailed medical records "to terrorize transgender teens in their states… opening the door to criminalizing women’s private reproductive health care choices." The most blatant of these attempts was from the Attorney General of Texas, who, according to the Senate Finance Committee, "sent demands to at least two non-Texas entities." 

[...] Despite these threats, legislators strengthened both the abortion and gender-affirming care provisions and pressed forward, passing the bill into law. Provisions found in the new bill include protecting people who "aid and assist" gender-affirming care and abortion, protections against court orders from other states for care obtained in Maine, and even protections against adverse actions by health insurance and malpractice insurance providers, which have been recent targets of out-of-state legislation aimed at financially discouraging doctors from providing gender-affirming care and abortion care even in states where it is legal.

Maine Gov. Janet Mills (D) signs gender-affirming care and abortion sanctuary state bill LD227 into law despite the best efforts of right-wing anti-trans extremists such as Riley Gaines, Courage Is A Habit, and Libs of TikTok who sought to thwart its passage and signature into law.

[adamsvanrhijn]

the thing about house md is it is egregiously unrealistic at best and generally moreso Inaccurate, for everything from hospital administration to actual medical happenings. but also it's funny because it is Constantly lampshaded that this is the case. like. one of the fellows tries to work at another hospital but is fired and cannot get a job outside of princeton plainsboro teaching hospital because even when he is trying to be more conservative he is completely out of line for medical practice literally everywhere else. as soon as there is an outsider who tries to run things it is called out that at minimum house's bizarre choices are not required for him to do his job and at worst are actively detrimental to it. (despite this character being an asshole who is promptly written off he is in fact Not the one portrayed as unreasonable in many of those interactions.) the majority of the hospital's legal fees are spent on defending house from lawsuits. they have the maximum possible medical malpractice insurance coverage because house is employed there. patients and hospital staff are constantly calling out the team's behavior as unreasonable and unfair to other patients (who have normal conditions they are also dying from). it is made clear the team is only tolerated because of their consistent diagnostic success. local organ donation board members hate him