An unlikely combo to be sure, but he serves up some malpractice views from the other side:

As to the counter, from reading in the medical blogosphere, I think that many physicians simply don’t like adversarial settings. That’s true of most of us, even most lawyers, but I think physicians in particular are acutely sensitive to it. Maybe it’s the fact that they (like preachers) aren’t used to being questioned and very much enjoy being captain of the ship. I know many don’t feel that way, but in general polls show the public very much respects and admires them, and juries certainly defer to them. But it’s the process of reaching the truth in our justice system that they don’t like . . .

. . . But making us the scapegoat doesn’t change the fundamental problems with medicine. For malpractice, even given the worst assumptions about it, is a tiny percentage of its ills. The other problems require far more thought and time to fix, and indeed in some ways seem insurmountable. How do you provide for the largest elderly population in US history? A group with accumulated savings unlikely to last as long as they do? What is going to happen when foreign nations don’t so easily fund our adventures, and politicians start looking around to cut costs? Who better than doctors, who are already pretty well off, at least as compared to the rest of the population.