Tort Reform Would be A Great New Year’s Resolution


By Nathan Tabor

The right to seek justice in a court of law is fundamental to our American way of life. If a person has been wronged, cheated, or hurt by the actions of another, whether intentionally or negligently, the injured party is entitled to just compensation. That’s only fair. So I hold a deep respect for the right of individuals to access our civil courts.

But like President Bush, I still believe that we must make reforming our system of civil litigation a top priority in 2005. We need common-sense reforms that will restrict frivolous lawsuits, abolish joint and several liability provisions, and limit outrageous punitive damage awards that are completely out of proportion to actual losses.

The number of civil lawsuits filed in our courts has tripled over the past 40 years. Often these lawsuits have no real merit but are used simply to extort cash payments from the person or business being targeted. (The Reverend Jesse Jackson is an expert at this kind of race-based extortion) And many times, even if the plaintiff is in the right, the “boxcar damages” awarded by juries are completely out of proportion to the actual harm suffered.

Interesting fact: almost half of the money won in malpractice lawsuits ends up in the pockets of the plaintiff’s attorneys. Maybe that’s why the American Trial Lawyers are so adamantly opposed to tort reform.

Often innocent businesses have to settle such lawsuits even when they are in the right. Unfortunately, this whole process costs us jobs. When a business is forced to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars defending against frivolous lawsuits, it has less money to expand its operations, invest in research or hire more employees.

This whole corrupt practice isn’t about evil corporations and their hapless victims who need legal protection. It is nothing more than legalized larceny, and it needs to be stopped!

Nowhere is this truer than in the medical profession. The rapidly escalating cost of liability insurance has reached unaffordable levels for an increasing number of medical practices. Some doctors have to pay as much as 50 percent of their gross income for malpractice insurance. Yet in our litigious society they can’t afford to be without it. Many OB-GYN’s today find themselves forced to cease delivering babies altogether.

Personal story: My wife and I have a baby due in January. However, because of rising malpractice insurance our midwife can no longer deliver our baby.

Every day, the cost of health care in America increases because physicians feel compelled to practice “defensive medicine,” often prescribing unnecessary but expensive tests, operations or medicines, rather than risk a lawsuit.

North Carolina’s Senator John Edwards campaigned for Vice President on the theme that he came from a poor working family but pulled himself up by his own bootstraps to become a self-made millionaire. What hypocrisy.

We need to stop these frivolous lawsuits and put caps on disproportionate punitive damages. Or even better yet, move to the English model. There, if you sue somebody and lose, you pay the legal fees for the other side. This might be a simple solution to a complicated problem.

One thing for sure, tort reform would be a great gift for the American people!



(Nathan Tabor is a conservative political activist based in Kernersville, North Carolina. He has his BA in Psychology and his Master’s Degree in Public Policy. He is a contributing editor at www.theconservativevoice.com. Contact him at Nathan@nathantabor.com).





ANOTHER PUBLIC MEDICINE TRIUMPH

When we allow for the famous British "fudge", "acceptable" translates as "woeful"

Half the hospitals in England have only "acceptable" levels of cleanliness, assessments by the Department of Health show.

But only 24 were rated poor and three unacceptable, as the department issued instructions designed to make hospitals cleaner places. The new guidance gives instructions on how often different areas of the hospital should be cleaned. Very high-risk areas, such as intensive care units, should have floors cleaned twice a day with a wet mop, be machine cleaned once a week and stripped and resealed once a year. Low-risk areas, such as corridors, need a full clean only once a week and a machine clean once a quarter.

The fact that the department should feel the need to tell hospitals how to keep their premises clean indicates some lack of confidence in local management, despite repeated promises to decentralise control. The latest inspections found that 10 per cent of hospitals (118) were "excellent", 456 "good", 583 "acceptable", 24 "poor" and 3 "unacceptable"....

Lord Warner, the Health Minister, said that there was no clear link between hospital cleanliness and rates of infection by the superbug MRSA, though it was not unreasonable for the public to make such a link. "If a hospital is well cleaned, it is more likely that it will have low infection rates. But you could still get an infection in a spotless hospital," he said. He said that the rise of MRSA had stalled in the past few years, coinciding with the department making mandatory the collection of figures on MRSA bloodstream infections. But hospital infections continue to rise. All that has stopped increasing is the proportion of infections caused by MRSA, which have stuck at about 40 per cent of the total...

["Collection of figures" prevents disease? Colour me skeptical!]

Paul Burstow, the Liberal Democrat health spokesman, said: "Government targets hamper the effort against infection. Patients are shunted from ward to ward and there is not enough time to clean beds properly between patients. "Infection-control staff are often ignored and the spread of infections continues. "Ministers' promises to fly in experts from overseas is an insult to experts in this country. We have infection-control nurses and doctors who know what needs to be done. The problem is that they are not being listened to." ...

Hospital-acquired infections, including MRSA, are blamed for 5,000 deaths a year. But campaigners claim that the true toll could be more than twice this figure.

More here

***************************

For greatest efficiency, lowest cost and maximum choice, ALL hospitals and health insurance schemes should be privately owned and run -- with government-paid vouchers for the very poor and minimal regulation.

Comments? Email me here. If there are no recent posts here, the mirror site may be more up to date. My Home Page is here or here.

***************************