A new ad campaign has been launched in seven states to “inform” public opinion on the pitfalls of capping malpractice lawsuit lottos.
Here’s a bit from the article describing the plight of one set of parents:
One of the new ads features the mother and father of a 2-year-old boy who died of dehydration. The child is shown in an oversized cowboy hat, drinking from his baby bottle while his parents mourn their loss.
“All he needed was an IV … It’s unheard of in the United States. You don’t lose children to dehydration,” says the child’s mother, Shawnna Gardner.
“They lose one of their sons or daughters to medical malpractice, they won’t be concerned about putting caps on damages,” says the boy’s father, Vern Gardner, referring to the bill’s critics.
Message: Little Billy was priceless, but we’ll take two million for him.
Get a clue, people. Sometimes accidents and oversights happen, and money should not alleviate your suffering. An accident calls of this sort calls for a thorough inquiry and perhaps a warning to the attendants if they were not grossly derelict or malicious, but not a chingchingching payout for the bereaved at the expense of everyone else left paying into the system.
I mean, get a load of this ad:
In the third commercial, a young boy buying a candy bar is told the cost is $14.03. “But it’s only a candy bar,” he says. “Yeah, but my investments lost a lot of money. So, I’m gouging my customers,” the store owner replies.
What the store owner needs to say is, “Yeah, but little schnucking Charlie on the next block put a whole schnucking chocolate bar into his mouth before riding his bike down the embankment from a freeway overpass and ramming head on into an electrical utility pole whereupon he choked on the candy bar. So now I have to pay malcandy insurance because I can’t be sure you’re not part of the same chocolate-choking death cult, kid, take it or leave it.”
But I guess that runs longer than thirty seconds.