No legislation is complete without tort reform.
Xxxxxxxxxx
Nothing could be further from the truth. Bad doctors, egregious negligence is a horrible abuse for the patients who suffer it. There absolutely MUST be recourse for such patients.
Lawyers only take almost sure win suits because it is expensive and time consuming.
What solution to bad doctoring would you suggest?
Who pays the jackpot settlements? WE DO. Through a combination of higher insurance rates, increased drug costs, and charges for procedures. Who wins? The lawyers. And the gubermint from the taxes on the settlement. Corporations don't pay taxes and penalties, the customers do. It's all pass-through. Back when the ACA was in the news, there was an item that said 10% of healthcare costs was related to malpractice premiums.
You watch the TV commercials and you realize the final step in the life-cycle of a drug is a lawsuit. When there's foul play, definitely punish those responsible. But also factor in there's risk for cutting-edge treatments. Did that stent give you 10 more years? Was its breaking free something that could have come out in clinical trials or was it something that could not be known at the time? Should any settlement amount go to fill someone's pocket or set up a fund for corrective surgery. If we wait for everything to be proven to the nth degree, how many don't get those extra years from the best technological advancements available. We, through Congress, push for fast-track availability of the latest cure but then turn around and sue, sue, sue around when something goes wrong. There has to be a balance and a recognition that there are risks and trade-offs.
You say lawyers will only take the lucrative cases? Well, there's a reason for reform right there. What percentage of the victims go unrepresented? Hardly seems a fair or just system. No, I don't have the answers but I can recognize a system that isn't working.