Frivolous Lawsuits
2011-07-05 - by
Senate Chieftain Phil Berger reared up on his hind legs last week and, ripping into lawyers, said one way or the other he’s going to pass his bill to end ‘frivolous lawsuits.’
Only there’s one problem.
The bill Senator Berger’s dead set on passing isn’t really about ending frivolous lawsuits. Instead, the Medical Society gave Senator Berger a bill which protects doctors when they commit malpractice. For instance, the bill would protect a doctor who out of carelessness made a mistake that left a patient disfigured.
Now, there is no doubt there are frivolous lawsuits – but, by the same token, there is also no doubt there are lawsuits where a doctor commits malpractice.
The problem with Senator Berger’s bill is it protects all the doctors (whether they’re guilty or innocent) and punishes all the victims – regardless of their innocence. Morally, it’s like firing a shotgun into a crowd and saying, Well, sure, we hit some innocent people – but we hit some people who were not innocent too.
Or, to put it differently, Senator Berger seems to figure if a few innocent people have to suffer to spare the doctors, well, that’s the breaks. But that’s a shaky creed and Senator Berger’s a decent enough man to know how to write a bill that would stop frivolous lawsuits without victimizing a child or a housewife who ends up paralyzed due to malpractice.
More to the point: Why did Phil Berger and a group of his fellow Senators kill the amendment House Republicans added to his bill that fixed that flaws in his legislation? The answer may be simple politics: The Medical Society – and its allies – have given over $700,000 to Phil Berger and his fellow Senate Leaders.
Frivolous Lawsuits
2011-07-05/
Senate Chieftain Phil Berger reared up on his hind legs last week and, ripping into lawyers, said one way or the other he’s going to pass his bill to end ‘frivolous lawsuits.’
Only there’s one problem.
The bill Senator Berger’s dead set on passing isn’t really about ending frivolous lawsuits. Instead, the Medical Society gave Senator Berger a bill which protects doctors when they commit malpractice. For instance, the bill would protect a doctor who out of carelessness made a mistake that left a patient disfigured.
Now, there is no doubt there are frivolous lawsuits – but, by the same token, there is also no doubt there are lawsuits where a doctor commits malpractice.
The problem with Senator Berger’s bill is it protects all the doctors (whether they’re guilty or innocent) and punishes all the victims – regardless of their innocence. Morally, it’s like firing a shotgun into a crowd and saying, Well, sure, we hit some innocent people – but we hit some people who were not innocent too.
Or, to put it differently, Senator Berger seems to figure if a few innocent people have to suffer to spare the doctors, well, that’s the breaks. But that’s a shaky creed and Senator Berger’s a decent enough man to know how to write a bill that would stop frivolous lawsuits without victimizing a child or a housewife who ends up paralyzed due to malpractice.
More to the point: Why did Phil Berger and a group of his fellow Senators kill the amendment House Republicans added to his bill that fixed that flaws in his legislation? The answer may be simple politics: The Medical Society – and its allies – have given over $700,000 to Phil Berger and his fellow Senate Leaders.