Medical Malpractice-Civil Lawsuits As Remedy Is Fundamentally Flawed
Dear Citizen, May 2005
Bernard Sussman's article "How malpractice suits keep my profession honest" in the Roanoke Times (Roanoke, Virginia) addressed good points. However, its justification of civil suits as remedies is fundamentally flawed.
Sussman is correct that there are at times cover-ups within the medical profession. However, it is the fear of subjective and arbitrary lawsuits for unquantifiable monetary sums that encourages this cynical concealment.A doctor will be hesitant to criticize another doctor's gross incompetence and negligence, without the benefit of hindsight, because of possible recrimination in an overzealous litigous and bureaucratic society implemented by a promiscuous judiciary. Also, civil windfalls punishes all doctors and patients. This therefore decreases incentives for doctors to be forthright on strictly a scientific and technical basis. For obviously genuine claims, criminal prosecution, which neither judge nor prosecutor is an attorney, is in order.
The Roanoke Times on May 12th again rationalizes unlimited tort power. Unfortunately many physicians welcome this as they coddle with the legal profession.This makes them relatively immune from meritorious suits while their "less established" competitors become more prone to harassment.
Sussman is correct that people legitimately victimized have no recourse.People should be allowed to present their own claims for objective review.
Harsha Sankar
908 Valley Ridge Road
Covington, Virginia 24426
Bernard Sussman's article "How malpractice suits keep my profession honest" in the Roanoke Times (Roanoke, Virginia) addressed good points. However, its justification of civil suits as remedies is fundamentally flawed.
Sussman is correct that there are at times cover-ups within the medical profession. However, it is the fear of subjective and arbitrary lawsuits for unquantifiable monetary sums that encourages this cynical concealment.A doctor will be hesitant to criticize another doctor's gross incompetence and negligence, without the benefit of hindsight, because of possible recrimination in an overzealous litigous and bureaucratic society implemented by a promiscuous judiciary. Also, civil windfalls punishes all doctors and patients. This therefore decreases incentives for doctors to be forthright on strictly a scientific and technical basis. For obviously genuine claims, criminal prosecution, which neither judge nor prosecutor is an attorney, is in order.
The Roanoke Times on May 12th again rationalizes unlimited tort power. Unfortunately many physicians welcome this as they coddle with the legal profession.This makes them relatively immune from meritorious suits while their "less established" competitors become more prone to harassment.
Sussman is correct that people legitimately victimized have no recourse.People should be allowed to present their own claims for objective review.
Harsha Sankar
908 Valley Ridge Road
Covington, Virginia 24426
posted by Harsha Sankar at 6:40 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home