Trial Lawyers Fight Back on Medical Malpractice

By: Brian Montopoli
Topics: In The News

The American Association for Justice, a group representing trial lawyers, has released a series of web videos designed to make the argument that malpractice litigation is important because medial error is real and can be devastating.

The group, Ben Smith reports, is alarmed that tort reform, long a Republican priority, "may re-emerge as grounds for compromise in the health care negotiations."

The videos feature Americans discussing tragedies that have befallen them because of medical error. The one above tells the story of Blake Fought, a 19-year-old who asphyxiated and died because a nurse improperly removed an IV line.

"98,000 patients are killed annually by medical errors," the group says. "That's like two 737s crashing every day for a whole year. Would we blame the passengers or the airlines? Tort law changes won't fix health care. Tell Congress to put patients first. There are 98,000 reasons why you should." The video closes with a plug for a Web site called 98000reasons.org.

According to Smith, the group has only bought Washington-area online ads thus far, "though a source close to the group says they're ready to go on air if fluid talks turn toward tort reform."

Brian Montopoli
Brian Montopoli is the senior political reporter at CBSNews.com.
Follow on Twitter »

13 Comments +

Add a Comment See all 13 Comments


by Kirstenthebandie March 1, 2010 11:50 PM EST: Malpractice suits while most of the time are justifiable, never actually give happiness the families who have had to file them. This family has been so strong and nothing can ever replace what they lost. However they made sure people were held accountable for their actions and that is a big part of their cause. Don't rush to be so harsh because you never know if it could happen to you.; Reply to this comment


by Wake Havasu November 13, 2009 1:55 AM EST: - Twenty-eight states have laws that limit payments in malpractice cases, and several studies indicate that these laws reduce the frequency and severity of malpractice claims and lower premiums.

- "The trial bar in many respects is the most influential lobby over the congressional leadership," he said. "The PAC money coming from the trial bar is second only to labor unions for Democratic candidates."

- Massachusetts Caps awards.; Reply to this comment


by endurorob_5 November 12, 2009 7:35 AM EST: If these lawyers are so concerned about the patients why don't they cut down their fee from 33% to 10%. It always amazed me that in the movie "Erin Brockovich" the family that suffered the most ended up with something like $500K or it may have been less but Erin Brockovich received a bonus of $1M. Is that the kind of justice lawyers speek of?; Reply to this comment

by Omnivorous November 12, 2009 2:17 AM EST

Tort reform needs to come before healthcare for illegals is even considered.

The scumbag lawyers have ruined this country with the pc plague, grossly inflated medical costs, product liability, class action extortion games and OWN Washington DC.

They are the number one donor to the Democrats, yet still the Republicrats kiss thier ***** and refuse to go after them the way they should.

Could that possibly be because damn near everyone in DC is a parasitic lawyer?

Nothing to see here folks. Everythings just peachy.

Reply to this comment


by gomesie22 November 12, 2009 3:13 PM EST: If the Republicans wanted to change tort reform why don't they do it tomorrow in all those red states. 95% of ALL medical suits are STATE cases and they're regulated by State government. States could cap them anytime they want! It's just a Republican talking point to oppose health care reform. Instead of making the bad guys the insurance companies they make them the lawyers. If the Dem.'s put a cap of medical suit payments in the health care bill then the Rep. would complain that they are violating states rights to govern themselves. Same is true for selling insurance across state lines. It's a state by state issue NOT the federal governments. Lawsuits will emerge if any restrictions are placed on state governments, just wait and see.


by huegorgan November 12, 2009 12:11 AM EST: Luckily, our Forefathers were so infinitely wise that they wrote the 7th amendment, thereby ensuring ALL Americans their God-given right to sue. Tort-reform to improve health-care is akin to gun-control legislation to stop murders.

Get your heads out of the sand and realize that tort-reform does NOTHING to lessen insurance premiums. They will continue to go higher as they have in states that have unconstitutionally capped damage awards. Until there is a public option for health care, even for millionaires, the insurance companies' collusion will continue.; Reply to this comment


by JEngdahlJ November 11, 2009 10:10 PM EST: Today's medical professional liability system is too adversarial and too expensive. There are alternatives. More at http://www.healthcaretownhall.com/?p=1779; Reply to this comment

by bradkt1 November 11, 2009 10:00 PM EST

As a retired lawyer, I have seen too much nonsense and greed from others in my profession. The overwhelming majority of these types of lawsuits are settled by insurances companies prior to trial. Malpractice (e.g.: negligence) lawsuits are a cash cow for lawyers...not insurance companies. The insurance companies just raise their rates on the rest of us afterwards.

In this type of lawsuit, the lawyer hires "hired gun" professional witnesses to second guess someone's decisions. A jury then gets lost in technical minutiae and the lawyer's case sounded good to the jury. The jury thinks that maybe the doctor...or the manufacturer...or whoever...should have done something more and hands out a huge award. In a health care setting, the result is that doctors are required to do everything possible...even if their common sense and experience tells them how to deal with a situation without doing so...just to CYA. The result is both higher medical costs and insurance premiums...not to mention more lawsuits. The present system is the worst of both worlds.

This same argument was made by the trial lawyers lobby in states that switched over to no-fault auto insurance and the sky didn't fall like they warned us. The sky won't fall now either of there is substantial tort reform as a part of health care reform.

When you make laws, you can't make them for the exceptional case. You have to make them for the situation that is the general rule...and then carve out a few exceptions if necessary.

Reply to this comment


by retm-w November 11, 2009 10:52 PM EST: bradk11 Thank you for being an honest lawyer.

by gramto8 November 11, 2009 7:50 PM EST

If you do a search on Blake Fought, you find that he had an IV in his neck. When the nurse removed the IV, he supposedly developed an air bubble in his heart. This is NOT asphyxia. Asphyxia is when the OXYGEN supply is cut off, as in when someone is being throttled or smothered. I surely do not want these 'lawyers' for any problems I might encounter!!

Reply to this comment


by afought March 1, 2010 11:13 PM EST: Do you have any idea what you are saying? It is obvious, you dont. An enormous amount of air entered Blake's subclavian vein through the open site where the central line was removed improperly by that nurse and then circulated around his body. Air is not meant to be in the circulatory system. The air took the place where Oxygen and blood was supposed to be. His brain, and lungs and heart were deprived of oxygen and he absolutely asphyxiated. The oxygen to these vitals organs was cut. If you are going to comment on something, next time, try to be more intelligent and get the facts correct. And while you're at it, when commenting on such a tragic subject as the death of a child, why dont you remember there is a grief stricken family some where on the other end of this topic who is grieving the lose of their child.

Dr Amy Fought, Mother of Blake Fought who was featured in this story


by retm-w November 11, 2009 7:00 PM EST: The only reason the trial lawyers are against it, is it will cut into their profits. They could care less about the patient, it's about how much they make on the lawsuit.; Reply to this comment


by bajajohn1 November 11, 2009 6:30 PM EST: Tort reform only inures to the benefit of insurance companies. The vitims or their families have been limited to small recoveries in many states. Tort reform is the product of insurance company lobbies who seek to increase profitability at the expense of the victims of medical negligence. People do die or are severely disabled, I know this firt-hand.

Guess who picks up the tab for lifetime treatment for survivors of medical negligence? Taxpayers who have to pay for their medical care. All the insurance companies and their willing Republican accomplices in Congress are doing is shifting the risk to the public.; Reply to this comment