Real Time Analytics


 

REAL TORT REFORM


As the debate over health care “reform” has been raging, one of the flash points for both parties has been over malpractice tort reform.

When doctors are spending over half a million dollars a year just for their insurance premiums, something is really wrong. You cannot watch daytime TV without seeing ads for personal injury attorneys, trolling for new clients.

The primary reform offered is to cap pain and suffering judgments. The most common figure is $250,000. The theory is that plaintiff’s lawyers take a cut of the recovery and the biggest part of the recovery is the award for pain and suffering, if that figure is limited, the lawyers will start looking elsewhere and there will be fewer lawsuits.

I do not like that. First, I think it is the right of the jury to decide that. A jury can punish a bad doctor with a large verdict. Arbitrary government caps interfere with the free market. Finally, what is your pain and suffering worth? If a doctor screws up and leaves me in pain for the rest of my life, I can guarantee you, my pain and suffering is worth a whole lot more than $250,000.

So what is the solution?

In litigation, there are three types of burdens of proof. The first is proof beyond a reasonable doubt. This is the burden of proof in criminal cases. In civil cases, the burden of proof is a preponderance of the evidence. All that means is, that is it more likely than not, something happened. Basically, you flip a coin.

There is a third burden of proof, called clear and convincing evidence. It is only used in a few types of hearings, but if we want real tort reform, then all we need to do is to raise the burden of proof in medical tort cases from a preponderance of the evidence to clear and convincing evidence. This would eliminate many really weak lawsuits, yet would allow juries to compensate someone who has been badly injured by true negligence.

This is a tort reform that would cost absolutely nothing.

This is simple and would be effective. Which is probably why you do not hear a word about it coming from Washington.

Views: 0

Comment

You need to be a member of Tea Party Nation to add comments!

Join Tea Party Nation

Comment by Simon Jester on December 6, 2009 at 5:57pm
Common sense solution, to a complicated issue. TY
Comment by Hammer on December 6, 2009 at 1:25pm
Loser pays will end all of that. If the accuser has a strong case, then he will not worry about the cost or high quality of his counsel. The accused will settle without going to court without having to pay the legal bills if he has a weak defense. Likewise, the accuser would never bring a weak case to court for fear of having to be impoverished by the legal bills of the high octane lawyers of the defense team. The courts would be cleaned out in a matter of weeks. The government should also pay the same as the people. If they want to go on a witch hunt against a citizen, then they should have to pay for the best defense money can buy, and it should be payed as soon as the first judgment is handed out. If there are any appeals, the government should have to pay each step of the way, not after they have impoverished the citizen into giving up by attrition!
Comment by Nathan on December 6, 2009 at 9:28am
I agree with you wholeheartedly, Judson. Well said!
Comment by Linda W on December 6, 2009 at 9:26am
Thanks for shedding light on this issue, Judson.

I find it ironic that the Glenn Beck TV show on Fox - and others on Fox - are supported by trial lawyers' advertisements.

Tea Party Nation is a social network

 






© 2013   Created by Judson Phillips.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service