Legal Myths: The McDonald's "Hot Coffee" Case
More Info on Tort Reform (blog)Obama on Tort Reform (CBS transcript)
NYT articles on Tort Reform (malpractice)
This case involves a 79 year old Stella Liebeck in New Mexico who in 1992, bought a cup of coffee at a McDonalds drive-through and spilled it on herself (coffee at about 180-190 degrees Fahrenheit). She incurred 3rd degree burns, and underwent skin graft operations (hospitalized for about a week). After denied attempts to settle with McDonalds for hospital costs, Liebeck took the case to court and was awarded "$2.9 million" in damages which was later reduced (however the headline stayed).
I thought that this article dealt more with the health care debate side of skin grafts (albeit in a slightly separated yet interconnected way). This case has since become one of the cornerstones concerning the debate over "excessive lawsuits". Tort Reform is a collection of proposed reforms that "all are designed to either limit the circumstances under which injured people may sue, limit how much money juries may award to injured people, or both" (whatistortreform.com). Tort reform is one method of reform that many (politically, mostly Republicans) think is the best way to reduce medical malpractice suits.
This article is found on a medical website, and was written by a doctor. The information provided is the basic information about skin grafts. It is not overwhelming with specific details and gives the impression that most of the time skin grafts are quite successful. Without prior knowledge of skin grafts, this site is very helpful in getting one started.
No comments:
Post a Comment