No surprise: A malpractice attorney is against special health courts

“It would be a travesty to undermine our civil justice system based on the faulty premise that lay juries are not competent enough to decide facts ““ after presentation of both sides at trial ““ and that superior results would be achieved by having panels of doctors decide a patient’s right to compensation. True, there are specialty courts for bankruptcy, tax and other types of cases. But those courts were created to deal with special sets of laws, not special sets of facts. Whether a doctor injures a person on the operating table or driving to the hospital, facts are facts. And in America, the sole arbiter of facts is the jury.

The solution to the epidemic of medical errors is not to let doctors preside over malpractice cases against other doctors, adding yet another layer of politics and secrecy to an already failed system. The answer is to let juries of average people hear and decide malpractice cases.

The tort system, which has its roots in the Magna Carta, has served our country well for centuries, and continues to be the best safeguard of the rights of average citizens. On the other hand, secrecy and letting the ‘fox watch the henhouse’ has undermined public safety by covering up problems in order to avoid accountability. Why should this latest physician-sponsored proposal be any different?”