Plus the continued cost of care (curious of you to forget that little multimillion dollar tidbit).

Oh, please ! Who is going to pay for that boy ? The future patients of that hospital. or you think the money will come from the CEO's pension plan ?

Well, frankly, life is a bitch. I can accept the concept that there can be a standard where caps don't apply. Gross, agregious negligence, such as if this hospital knew the sprinklers werent' working and ignored it for financial reasons, would be an example.

Remember the movie "Class Action" with Gene Hackman? The "bean counters" at the auto company calculated that the costs of a recall and fixing the defective switch would be more than the future costs of legal action, so they didn't fix the problem and tried to hide it. Obviously, they didn't successfully hide it and our hero got a huge award for his client(s). I don't think caps should have applied in that case.

If a doctor is drunk or deliberately ignores something because it isn't worth the trouble, then caps should not apply.

However, if a doctor does his best and makes an "honest" mistake, then the aphorism "Life's a bitch" might just apply. Not everything is someone's fault and not everyone should be reimbursed by those not involved (other patients, stockholders, etc) for what is basically bad luck for the plaintiff.

Attack away, curious JD.

Dr. Tony, I agree with you that it shouldn't apply in the most egregious cases. The problem is, in nearly every proposal, it DOES. Rare is the exception for gross harm. Even so, why should there be a cap if it's just straight negligence?

Just because you make a mistake doesn't mean you should be insulated from the harm you cause if that mistake falls below the standard of care. If I "mistakenly" pull out in front of you and you are injured, do you think because it was an honest mistake that I shouldn't be held liable? Or that because I was driving my company's truck that I shouldn't have to pay because it hurts the shareholders? Should I get to cap your damages because it was an honest mistake?

You're right, not everything is someone's fault. I would never say that it was. I'd merely say that when you hurt someone because your actions fell below the standard of care, you ought to have to pay for it. Wouldn't you agree?

That wasn't an attack, was it?

What does universal health care have to do with tort reform?

Future medical care is paid in malpractice cases. No tort reform proposal contemplated anywhere puts limits on economic damages (future medical care)......with the exception of government entities. They HAVE managed to limit their economic liability.

Curious or anonymous that little boy is struggling and negligence
should be paid by insurance companies that the dr.s or hospitals must have. Same as
one's homeowners or automobile insurance! There is Not a dollar amount for anyone's life however,
it would make things easier for
the little boy to cope and understand our system! What an introduction?? He doesn't deserve a button he deserves JUSTICE...

Don't You have a Beaumont Doctor??
NOT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!