Military Medical Malpractice
http://thekojonnamdishow.org/shows/2012-02-20/military-medical-malpractice
Since 1950, the Feres Doctrine has prohibited members of the military from suing the government for medical malpractice from treatment in a military medical facility. Now, US attorneys in Florida are arguing that the doctrine can also extend to suits involving the care of military dependents. We get a better understanding of the doctrine, its implications and what potential changes would mean for military families.
Guests
Jonathan Turley
J.B. & Maurice C. Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law, George Washington University; practicing defense attorney
Andrew Tilghman
Senior Writer and Pentagon Correspondent; Military Times Newspapers
Related Links
Related Video
CBS News story on military malpractice laws:
Comments
Please familiarize yourself with our Code of Conduct and Terms of Use before posting your comments.
I listened to this show in my car and was not able to telephone to comment on the air. I have no expertise when it comes to the legal rationale for Feres specifically. I will take issue with Professor Turley's insistence on 1) the quality of military healthcare is inferior to the civilian sector and 2) Feres prevents the threat of lawsuit and this is the reason military healthcare is inferior to the civilian sector.
He cites no evidence for his first assertion. Joint Commission inspection results on military treatment facilities are public knowledge and the military compares very favorably. What data does he have to support the claim of inferior quality? On the radio, he cites "his research" anecdotally. I quick survey of his bio on the GW website only lists one article on Feres that might contain relevant data. However it is from 2003 and was not readily available online. He made no specific mention of any data on the radio. Moreover, he made an egregious description of the Walter Reed incident as if to broadly characterize the system as a whole based on that episode. He appears not to have known that the what happened at Walter Reed had absolutely nothing to do with the actual practice of medicine and the quality of that care. A common misconception, but it reflects poorly.
As to his second assertion that the threat of lawsuit would improve the system, I'm not aware of any public policy research that has borne this out. Certainly tort reform does lower costs. Are Joint Commission results better in states without tort reform, where the threat of lawsuits allegedly drives up quality of care???
Professor Turley fails to present any reviewable data to back up his claims. Perhaps his eight-year old paper has something in it?
Overall a very lopsided discussion of an important issue, Kojo. Perhaps someone who felt Feres was good law should be brought onboard next time.