Medical Progress Today
mpt home | sign up

Volume 3, Number 14
April 21, 2006


PRINTER FRIENDLY

Commentary

Rein in the Monster

John Calfee, New York Sun, 4-12-06

Calfee offers a powerful analysis of the central flaw afflicting pharmaceutical litigation in U.S. Courts. He argues, in short, that medical issues in these cases are often so complex that juries just end up guessing—or voting based mainly on emotional considerations.

Yesterday, a New Jersey jury added $9 million in punitive damages to $4.5 million in compensation it had awarded to John McDarby, a 77-year–old man who had sued the drug manufacturer Merck after suffering a heart attack while taking the pain reliever Vioxx. That verdict did not tell us much about Vioxx, Merck, and even the Food and Drug Administration, but it certainly provided a lot of unpleasant news about the tort system...

Now, if we ask a jury to do the impossible, we're asking for trouble. And if we ask it to do the impossible with tens of billions of dollars in the balance, we're asking for big trouble. Yet that's what we did last week in that New Jersey courtroom. Does this mean we should junk the liability system, at least for pharmaceuticals? Not at all. The system works reasonably well for outlier situations such as intentionally hiding essential information from the FDA and others, or marketing drugs that clearly fail a cost-benefit test while withholding exactly the information that would have disclosed that fact. But today's system cannot work well for close calls, at least not when the stakes are in the billions or tens or hundreds of billions of dollars. Analysts expect tens of thousands of cases roughly similar to Mr. McDarby's. Juries will continue to guess at the central issues, getting it wrong as often as right but charging Merck $10 million or $20 million or $40 million every time they're wrong. A thousand mistakes is $10 billion to $40 billion. And a lot of states make it easier than New Jersey does to award punitive damages.

Nor is Vioxx the only drug where this perverse logic could play out. The liability plaintiff bar is honing the same methods for other drugs where similar imponderables can generate $10 million guesses.

What to do? There is a simple way to keep these questions out of the reach of juries. The states can do what the FDA has already suggested they do: Stop letting plaintiff lawyers seek huge awards for behavior that actually complies with the FDA's regulations and findings of fact. With lawyers bringing thousands of cases before juries that read about the evils of the drug companies every day and then have to decide the central issues through guesswork, we are now creating a monster. It is time to rein that monster in.

Source: http://www.aei.org/publications/pubID.24221,filter.all/pub_detail.asp


Medical Progress Today is published by the Center for Medical Progress at the Manhattan Institute for Policy Research.

For more information about Medical Progress Today, please contact the managing editor, Paul Howard, at phoward@manhattan-institute.org, or via telephone at 212.599.7000.

Press inquiries regarding Medical Progress Today can be directed to the Communications Department, at communications@manhattan-institute.org, or via telephone at 212.599.7000.

If you would like to unsubscribe, please reply to us and type "Unsubscribe" in the subject line.

In this week's issue:

spotlight

Patients Adrift in a Sea of Clinical Trials

news

Putting a Band-Aid on small firms' health costs
Patients asked to sign vow: No frivolous suits

commentary

Three simple solutions to cure Medicare prescription-plan ills
Health Policy in Maryland and Massachusetts: A Study in Contrasts
Rein in the Monster
Power to the Patients

research

"Costs and Benefits of Health Information Technology"
An Exploratory Analysis of Pharmaceutical Price Disparities and Their Implications Among Six Developed Nations
Center for Medical Progress 
Copyright Manhattan Institute for Policy Research
52 Vanderbilt Avenue
New York, NY 10017
(212) 599-7000
mpt@manhattan-institute.org