I sometimes think half the population of the country is made up of lawyers. It seems that everything ends up in the courts. Pass a law? Off to the judges with it to see if they like it (they usually don’t.) Something bad happen to you? It has to be the fault of somebody else, usually the person with the deepest pockets. Raining today? The weatherman said it probably wouldn’t. Where’s the number of that lawyer I saw on TV?
OK, I overstate matters, but barely. If I omitted the name of the country that I was talking about nobody would have any problem in guessing it. I think it was Dick the Butcher in one of the Henry VI plays that said first thing we do let’s kill all the lawyers and I sometimes wonder if he had the right idea. But to the matter for debate. Recognizing that many of the frivolous lawsuits that are usually referenced by critics had zero chance of success and also acknowledging the vital role of the judiciary constitutionally is it at all possible that the US is too litigious for its own good and if that is the case can the patient be cured or would any treatment prove worse than the disease?
According to this, we’re #5, behind Germany, Sweden, Israel, and Austria.
I wouldn’t be surprised if one way to move us farther down the list would be to change the way we pay for medical care. There must be a lot of lawsuits that do nothing other than determine which pot of money should be reduced to pay a certain medical bill.
In the UK there was a change in the law that restricted access to ‘Legal Aid’ to hire a lawyer. So the market was opened up for legal claims companies and insurance companies. Now we have all kinds of frivolous claims, all tied to some insurance policy and our TV channels are full of amulance chaser type ads.
Litigation is how a civilized society settles conflicts. I much prefer our system to one in which people just engage in self help or just have to endure inequitable behavior.
The last time I showed up for jury duty, the judge describing the process to all of us mentioned that roughly half of the jury trial cases in our county (Delaware County, PA) were medical malpractice cases. The total includes both criminal and civil cases.
Litigation is certainly better than sheer force. But it needn’t be the only peaceful way to resolve disputes - formalised complaints procedures and compensation schemes, mediation/arbitration, and so on, are all viable alternatives.
Maybe less so in that respect. I don’t understand why you’re making this a thing.
If I say that torture is not a civilized way of obtaining information, or the death penalty is not a civilized way of punishing people for crime, or a civilized society doesn’t allow the unchecked spread of firearms, or a civilized society guarantees health care and education to all citizens, or a civilized society doesn’t discriminate against minorities, are you going to sit there and be upset on behalf all the countries that fail to meet those standards?
I’m stating a value proposition. The use of litigation to resolve interpersonal disputes is more civilized compared to self help, or providing no restitution at all for civil harms.
For you to sit there and act like I’m insulting other countries by making such a statement is silly.
Some of those might qualify as “cheaper and faster forms of litigation” in effect. But in the United States, specifically, private mediation or arbitration is often just a way for the powerful to continue to oppress the weak. If I want justice, I want an actual judge or jury whose interpretation and application of the rules of justice are answerable to the public. I just want it to be cheaper.
