One day training seminars for health care staff of nursing homes, assisted living and adult day care have been held in 11 states. These were sponsored by individual health care corporations and other organizations such as the Quality Improvement Organizations charged by Medicare with improving the quality of care in long term care.
Sheila Lehner
lehners1@yahoo.com

We (pharmaceutical companies) need freedom from product liability so that we can devote more of our profits to the development of wonderful new drugs and devices for the betterment of society.

This argument is based on a number of assumptions that are:
1. The financial weight of “frivolous law suits” has prevented the development and marketing of some number of products that otherwise would have improved or saved some number of lives. (the actual numbers are not known)
2. The increased but unknown number of new products that would/could be marketed if the industry had the protection of product liability immunity (preemption) would certainly in no way ever harm a consumer to the extent that the industry should be held accountable for this harm.
3. Without the protection of liability immunity suddenly, maybe over night, the unknown financial weight of product liability law suits could increase to an unbearable burden thought the proliferation of some number of “frivolous law suits”. We haven’t yet defined the “frivolous law suit” but it’s bad and it’s huge.
4. The manufacturer is not able to price its product to cover its failure and the cost of possible law suits; therefore it always loses money because of this unknown factor.
5. State tort is incapable of preventing frivolous law suits.
6. State torte is incapable of judging right from wrong when it comes to pharmaceutical products.
Or pharmaceutical liability resolution defies logic and is always based on emotion and results in unwarranted restitution.
Or a jury of citizens does not have the mental capacity to understand the testimony of industry experts.
7. The only reason for state tort is to make the consumer and his/her lawyers rich.
8. The FDA is the “gold standard”. Once it has decided that a drug is safe for consumption any other opinion should be considered frivolous.
9. Having to comply with liability will cause pharmaceutical companies to become confused by more than one opinion about the safety of their product as various consumers experience the ill affects of its product.
10. The FDA is properly manned, with up to date technology and has the capacity to approve and monitor all current and new products and manufacturing facilities – even after the gold rush of a liability free blockbuster heaven occurs through preemption.
11. The FDA is free of political and industry influence. It does its job with one goal in mind and that is the protection of the American consumer.
12. Pharmaceutical companies never try to falsely influence the approval of their products and will react quickly when they find a problem.
13. There is always a risk when taking any drug or device, therefore the industry does not deserve to live under the burden of accountability no matter how many people its product kills or injures.

Of course I’m being a bit facetious or maybe in the words of Daniel Troy, I’ve made it sound more like a Hollywood movie. As a matter of fact I wonder how close to Mr. Troy’s script I came?