Utah Med Law

The Salt Lake Tribune reports that Utah Democrat Representative Jim Matheson wants a "few tweaks" in health reform.  At least one of these "tweaks" will restrict people injured by negligent health care providers from receiving what a jury thinks is fair, right and just.

Matheson is expected to introduce an amendment on medical malpractice "reform" that will limit the amount of money people can be awarded by juries for non-economic damages.  To be clear, non-economic damages are those claimed in a medical malpractice case that you can not place a dollar sign in front of.  For example let's say your son, daughter, wife, husband, father, mother or sibling goes to the hospital for treatment that requires a leg to be amputated.  Let's say that the doctors and hospital make a terrible mistake and amputate the wrong leg.  Your loved one still has to have the original leg amputated so he  / she ends up with no legs.  The doctors and hospital will be sued and let's assume that the case, for whatever reason, goes to trial.

The economic damages include such things as past and future medical expenses, past and future lost wages and any out-of-pocket expenses paid by the victim.  However he or she has to spend the rest of their life with no legs in a wheel chair.  The economic damages may add up to millions - let's say $4 million.  However, all of that money will go to compensate the victim for only financial losses.  There is nothing yet awarded by the jury for the pain and suffering - the non-economic damages.  Matheson would limit the jury's award to $250,000 for non-economic damages - pain and suffering - having to spend the rest of your life in a wheel chair.

Now I do not know about you but the loss of my legs are far more dear to me that $250,000.

The civil justice system is one of the hallmarks of the justice system in the United States.  We rely on our fellow good citizens to determine the amount of money that should be awarded in any given case.  Representative Matheson appears to think that he knows better than the public - better than a jury who hears the specific facts of the case. Who does he think he is?  I think he is putting the interests of special interest groups ahead of the rights of victims of medical malpractice.

Let me point out another injustice in Mr. Matheson's "tweak."  Those most egrigiously injured as a result of medical malpractice will be the most severely impacted by his "tweak."  Let's say your love one is killed as a result of medical malpractice.  You, as the surviving spouse, may be awarded some marginal compensation for the hard economic damages but yet only receive $250,000 for the loss of your life-time mate.  That strikes me as rediculous, calous and patently unfair. 

Comments (0)

Subscribe to this comment's feed