Malpractice lawsuits out of control

The North Carolina Senate is currently in the midst of a heated debate that will determine the future of medical malpractice lawsuits in the state. One of the primary points of contention is a proposal to cap "pain-and-suffering" damages awarded to plaintiffs. While patients and family-members negatively impacted by negligence or malpractice on the part of health care providers deserve compensation, a reasonable limit should be placed on monetary awards. If non-economic damages are not capped, skyrocketing insurance rates could force many physicians and health care providers to close their doors, and place an unnecessary strain on the health care system as a whole.  

The proposed malpractice damage caps would only affect non-economic awards to plaintiffs. These types of awards are commonly known as "pain-and-suffering" damages. In recent years, these awards have grown to exorbitant amounts, often exceeding hundreds of thousands or even millions of dollars. In addition, lawyers for plaintiffs can spend equally large sums during trials, hiring several expert witnesses costing anywhere from $100,000 to $200,000.   

Proponents of the caps claim that these types of suits are unreasonable--it is impossible to place a price tag on someone's painful experiences, and it is unreasonable to award someone several times more money in damages than they would conceivably have made in their entire lifetimes otherwise. Lawyers could go around in circles for years attempting to settle on a specific sum to associate with a plaintiff's particular ailments. Since it is impossible to place a pricetag on pain-and-suffering in individual cases, they should be capped at a reasonable sum for everyone. Economic damages, such as compensation for loss of income or living cost associated with disabilities would not be affected.

The strongest claim among proponents of these caps is that the threat of unreasonable malpractice suits has caused insurance rates for doctors to shoot through the roof. All physicians must pay inflated rates to protect themselves against the possibility of lawsuits, forcing many private doctors, or those with small practices, to shut down or refuse treatment to high-risk patients. This timidness amongst health care professionals is detrimental to everyone who seeks medical attention.  

The attempt to cap non-economic damages in malpractice suits is not a ploy to discourage patients from taking legal action, nor to limit the amount of money paid to malpractice attorneys. Plaintiffs and their legal representatives will still be given their due in economic damages, and a significant non-economic award. However, capping the awards will limit lawsuits from burgeoning further out of control, halt the current exodus of private physicians from their practices and reduce the monetary strain on our health care systems.