End of Life Decisions and Accountability for Medical Error or Failure to Properly Diagnose -- How Tort Reform Could Harm Patients and our Values
"Tort reform" sounds quaint, until you look under the hood and see what's really driving the engine.
Lawyers and the battles they fight on behalf of wronged clients are what often serves to keep the system accountable. Detractors say it's just about the money and greedy lawyers, but often the crux of the lawsuit isn't about money, it's about standing up for respect, integrity, and human decency.
Sure, sometimes this fight can only change an individual wrong, but other times fighting the good fight can change a broken system. Broken systems surround us and are out of balance -- medical care for the elderly is just one example that comes readily to mind.
It doesn't matter if you're from Massachusetts or Mississippi, end of life decisions will never be easy, but they should be made with proper medical evidence as this Mississippi case illustrates.
The Mississippi Supreme Court recently upheld a $4 million award to the family of a woman who was misdiagnosed with pancreatic cancer and then given a lethal dose of painkillers. An autopsy showed the woman never suffered from cancer. The daughter best summed it up, 'a simple lab test could have stopped this from happening.'
This should give you pause the next time you hear someone say, "we could run this lab test or that, but it's probably not going to show ..." If there's an option, why not run the test? Who is really being inconvenienced? Is it wise to place all our faith and offer complete deference to the "professionals" making important medical decisions about care. A healthy dose of "prove it to me" isn't a bad thing, especially when we're talking about life and death.
Sure it's easy to dismiss junk lawsuits, but cases like this above demonstrate that sometimes the only place to make a difference and force real change is to hit them in their pockets -- and hit them big. Now maybe a few more life or death tests will get ordered, maybe it will take even more verdicts to send a lasting message.
Of course, there are powerful interests that would like a limit on their economic liability -- they try to sell this in words like "reform," but it's really about protecting their profits and ignoring the pain caused to individuals who will undoubtedly suffer when greed and bonuses drive decisions over common decency and respect.
