In 1992 Stella Liebeck, 78, of Albuquerque, New Mexico was severely burned by a cup of McDonald’s coffee. In the subsequent lawsuit she was awarded $2.7 million even though the jury decided she was partially culpable. This lawsuit was the first lightening rod case where the public started adding words to its lexicon like “frivolous lawsuit” and “runaway jury”. Since then most people have become well aware of such things as the burglar who was able to successfully sue his victim, the angel dust user who was able to sue the police department for excessive force, the drunk who fell off of a ladder and then sued the manufacturer. All of these examples, and more created a new complexity in our society on many different levels.
One level was that individuals and groups saw the lawsuit as a means to “get paid” using the letter of the law to achieve what ethics and morals could not. The mindset behind this new approach of acquiring wealth is the concept that since we are all sinners we must be also all be vulnerable to legal recourse. The question left to those legal thrill seekers in this upside down culture of ours is not whether to sue, but why not sue. Of course many of those stalwart champions of justice, lawyers, were and are only too happy to campaign for these new found victims at a modest 40% contingency rate.
Another level was the subsequent backlash that this culture of victim hood generated and how easily it could be manipulated. Politicians and corporations constantly sang a steady song as to how all this litigation was costing our nation untold billions of dollars and how it was “hurting the children”. Indeed we reserve special anger whenever we hear news of someone suing and settling out of court for 2 million dollars over infected hangnails or perceived racial insults. We as a society “want something done” about these parasitic freeloaders who have manipulated the system for ill gotten gain.
In spring of 2005 Governor Blunt signed into law House Bill 393. It is the nebulous and wonderful “Tort Reform Bill”. In its provisions supposedly lay the solutions to the problem of the undeserving in our state not being able to sue their way to unwarranted riches. Indeed similar legislation has been passed by most states now. But what are the facts?
Missouri house bill 393 limits the award for pain and suffering to $350,000 and (more importantly) limits the time you have to bring a lawsuit to court to just 2 years. A bill before the U.S. Congress right now would reduce that dollar figure even lower making a nationwide cap of $250,000. On the surface this appears to be more than enough money and time for personal injury plaintiffs, but look closer at what is being done.
The people (lawyers) who wrote this law know that your average person has to have a lawyer to file a medical malpractice lawsuit. They also know about how much labor goes into that lawsuit. They know that to formulate a proper case takes money. How much? Figures vary but it is not uncommon for a medical malpractice lawsuit to cost upwards of $200,000 in man hours (remember lawyers get paid a lot of money). That doesn’t include expenses which come out of the plaintiffs pile. You also have to have a doctor to agree to testify also and the last time I checked they don’t come cheap either.
So by cleverly playing on the publics need to “do something about this crisis” the legislature has effectively made it unprofitable for attorneys to even mess with medical malpractice cases unless it is a slam dunk like a doctor performing while on crack. Plus, with no shortage of DUI’s and $15,000 life destroying divorce cases the legal industry is still not laying off any lawyers.
But MOST IMPORTANTLY does house bill 393 limit or significantly change frivolous lawsuits in any other area besides medical malpractice? Does it limit the amount you can collect for not having the right flavor of pudding on hand in schools and prisons? Harassment? Offensive language and behavior? The answer is no. It puts no limits on stupidity, just injury.
So, who or whom does this new law help? We were told that unless reform was passed doctors would have to leave their practices. We were told that reform would bring us lower health care costs. Has anybody seen a reduction in their health care cost? Didn’t think so. The answer is that it doesn’t help and protect doctors, medical staff and their patients as much as it protects that most vulnerable of victims, large corporate financial institutions in the form of the insurance industry. You got it, it protects those that already have obscene amounts of wealth already.
We lose sight of the fact that, reform or no reform, the medical malpractice system has only a modest direct cost burden on the medical services industry. In recent years, the national total of medical malpractice premiums has been less than one percent of total personal health care expenditures. As a consumer I feel that that is a small price to pay for knowing that my family can seek legal recourse. But since I’ve pointed out to you that that is now virtually impossible, where does that money go? Well, the answer is simple, nowhere. It stays right in the insurance industry’s larder.
I take that back, the insurance industry sends that money back out into the community in the form of political contributions to lawmakers at an astounding rate. According to the Center for Responsive Politics (opensecrets.org) nationally, and as an industry they rank as 7th in total political campaign giving. Over a 10 year period the industry gave $282,828,340 to candidates on the state and federal level. Is it any wonder that we now have legislation protecting their profits?
You need to ask yourself, what is the real problem? Medical malpractice. If we had better doctors we wouldn’t need better lawyers. No one seems to embrace the obvious though. The government’s solution is predictable; protect the wealthy contributors and people, that ain’t you. I liken it to the scenario that if your horse gets out of the barn burn down the barn to keep it from happening again.
Think of it this way. If I was to cause a traffic accident with the doctor that injured my wife and injured him and damaged his property I could use my state required insurance to make him whole. Indeed, I would feel relieved that I was able to relieve his suffering due to my mistake. In the world we live in now because he’s a doctor, wealthier and has a huge and powerful industry behind him he’s under no legal or moral responsibility to pay for his mistakes. Of course he’ll argue that that is what his med mal premiums go to but as I’ve pointed out those funds will only be disbursed to politicians.
I know that I’m taking a chance in writing this here. Bridget was injured, scarred and almost killed by a doctor’s careless mistake. Her life is now going to be harder because of that mistake. As a by and large Christian culture we view his tragic mistake primarily through the lens of forgiveness. I saw with my own eyes how tortured and heartbroken this man was by a moment’s accidental indiscretion. But, we don’t cut off his hands. We don’t sell his daughter into slavery We say that as long as he makes amends, he is forgiven. THAT used to be our credo. But now our leaders and our governments have cleverly taken away our ability to seek redress and by law those who possess vast sums of wealth are exempt from making amends. That process of basic Christian forgiveness which we hold dear to our basic fiber has now has a link torn from it. Is it any wonder our society is now so coarse and damaged?
By the way, Stella Liebeck, of Albuquerque, New Mexico received third degree burns on her inner thighs, perineum, buttocks, and genital and groin areas. She was hospitalized for eight days, during which time she underwent skin grafting. Liebeck, sought to settle her claim for $20,000, but McDonald’s refused. It was discovered during the case that based on a consultants advice, it held its coffee at between 180 and 190 degrees Fahrenheit to maintain optimum taste. The consultant admitted that he had not evaluated the safety ramifications at this temperature. Other establishments sell coffee at substantially lower temperatures, and coffee served at home is generally 135 to 140 degrees. Things aren’t always what they seem.
In writing this I offer no solutions although I seek them desperately. I know of no answer to this morass that we’re in. In telling you, the reader this I humbly ask for your ideas. Ideas, concepts, standards, that’s what we as a people used to be about. All I ask is that you tell other people what you’ve read here today and spread the word both far and wide. I pray that it has armed you with the will and courage to stand for something. IF the way of life in this beautiful country of ours is NOT about defending those that are trod upon, then I wish no part of it. I sincerely hope that you feel the same way.