The New Hampshire legislature is debating real screening panels vs half-assed screening

“The House Judiciary Committee took more than five hours of testimony Tuesday on the legislation (SB 214), which the Senate approved earlier this month.

The measure would require that all cases go through a panel consisting of a lawyer, doctor and retired judge. Any unanimous decision of the caseÂ’s merit could be introduced at trial. Last month, the House approved a competing measure (HB 702) that calls for only a retired judge to preside at an early stage and decide if the doctor was liable or the damage was an unfortunate but defensible medical result.”

Having a single judge weed though complex medical cases makes as much sense as a sole doctor making decisions on legal malpractice. Like I said, stick to what you know.

As for the lawyers’ arguments that proper screening “takes too much time” – well they should. Malpractice cases are complex and deserve to be carefully considered from both a medical and legal standpoint (i.e. by an impartial doctor, lawyer, and judge). Time should not supercede proper screening when it comes to medical malpractice cases.