Tort Reform Hurts People

On the surface, tort reform sounds like it might be a fine idea, but
the underlying premise is flawed and would actually hurt those it is
supposed to help.

The great health care debate has actually dragged up more for
discussion besides health issues, and one of those issues deals with
the concept of tort reform. Tort reform sounds like not a bad idea
until one really takes a close look at what it means to victims of
medical malpractice whose lives have been devastated.

Typically, medical malpractice lawsuits that make it to court are
the ones in which the victim has sustained serious injuries; injuries
that have altered their lifestyles to the point where they need ongoing
medical care of one type or another. They may also need therapy,
medications, regular treatments, counseling, in-home care and
renovations to make their house livable. In instances such as this,
juries have been known to hand out high awards to pay for such serious
damages.

Tort reform would stack the deck even further against the victims.
Physicians and hospitals already have a significant advantage going
into a medical malpractice lawsuit because med mal cases have the
shortest statute of limitations for any case. Mounting a complex med
mal lawsuit with only a year to get things together is nigh onto
impossible. While the clock is ticking in favor of the defendants, the
plaintiffs are struggling to get evidence together to prove their case.

In addition, a lawsuit cannot be filed against a doctor or hospital
unless it has been certified by a qualified medical expert to be a
lawsuit of merit so these are not frivolous lawsuits.

If these points are not enough to ponder, add in that any
incriminating evidence or information uncovered by internal
investigations into an injury or death cannot be discovered by the
patient or the patient’s family. Talk about prejudicial actions.

Furthermore, insurance companies protecting the doctor and/or
hospital have financial and other resources and access to experts that
far exceed the resources available to most patients. Add to this that
the primary evidence in any medical malpractice case is the medical
chart, which is authored by the doctor(s) and other medical personnel
at a hospital, and the patient has no say in what goes in that chart,
nor any control over it. Once again, the deck is stacked in favor of
the medical profession and the victim is left hanging out in the wind
trying to make a case.

Unfortunately for the victims of med mal, jurors are usually more
sympathetic to a doctor being sued than the patient, particularly if it
is the patient’s family who has brought the suit to court. Even if a
plaintiff/patient does stick to their guns and pursues the case, 48 out
of 50 states have capped the limit on the amount of damages that may be
recovered. This cap has no relation to actual injuries and is only in
place so the insurance companies may have a “fixed” cost when insuring
negligent doctors.

In a nutshell, tort reform means patients having to give up
constitutional rights just to have access to health care, and insurance
companies coming out ahead by limiting their claim payouts. The person
who needs the most help is the patient, and tort reform does anything
“but” help a patient who has suffered at the hands of the medical
establishment. Victims of medical malpractice need to get an
experienced med mal attorney to help level the playing field.

To learn more about Cleveland medical malpractice, Cleveland malpractice lawyer, Cleveland medical malpractice, Cleveland medical malpractice lawyer, visit Christophermellino.com.