Court Considers Protecting Drug Makers From Lawsuits

[flashl]

Source: NY Times

WASHINGTON — Less than a week after issuing a sweeping ruling that bars most lawsuits against medical device makers, the Supreme Court heard arguments Monday in the first of two cases that could determine whether drug makers receive similar protection.

Justice Stephen G. Breyer said the fundamental question in the cases was who should make the decisions that will determine whether a drug is “on balance, going to save people or, on balance, going to hurt people?”

“An expert agency on the one hand or 12 people pulled randomly for a jury role who see before them only the people whom the drug hurt and don’t see those who need the drug to cure them?” Justice Breyer asked.

Normally a member of the court’s liberal wing, Justice Breyer came down squarely on the industry’s side when he answered his own question, saying Congress left the role of policing the medicine market exclusively to the Food and Drug Administration.

NY TImes

Read more: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/26/washington/26drug.html

---

FDA oversight has been lacking to say the least and its decisions often literally leave the public to fend for themselves. If the public must become researchers, pharmacologists, and medical scientists when deciding to take a drug then legal recourse should be a part of that process.

[Rabrrrrrr]

1. So I guess the Republicans are slowly getting their tort reform - by making suing illegal.

That's great!

Make bankruptcy damn near impossible for a person, and then make it impossible to sue any company that might in some way have led to that need for bankruptcy.

I love compassionate conservatism.

It's so wonderfully hurtful.

[fed-up]

2. the word ACCOUNTABILITY will soon be removed from most dictionaries nt

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

3. Damn activist judges.

[The Backlash Cometh]

4. And now Congress is going to move to give the FDA immunity.

Actually, they already have by restraining the trial lawyers.

This country, does not care about people. How can it possibly be more apparent?

[Demeter]

5. And Where Did The Supremes Get THEIR Medical Degrees?

I hope the next one dies of some totally fraudulent drug. That would learn them.

[pinto]

6. Here's the important role reversal by the FDA, pre and post Bushco (same article):

Before the Bush administration, the F.D.A. argued that lawsuits provided patients with additional protection. Now, the administration says the lawsuits largely conflict with the agency’s ability to do its job, and several of the justices seemed to agree.

[askeptic]

7. Wasn't Thalidomide FDA Approved?

After gutting the FDA and loading it with industry cronies, it's a lot worse now. Sounds like the SC is saying we'd be better off without an FDA. If the mere fact that something goes through a regulatory agency absolves the manufacturer of liability, we are all up the creek - especially with the corruption that has now become the norm rather than the exception.

[blackspade]

8. Crazy.

This makes no sense at all from a consumer standpoint.
This essentially a way for them to eliminate tort cases all together in a step by step process.
What's next? How about baring suits for faulty cars, lead covered toys, and poisoned food?
All of these things are supposed to be regulated by various government agencies.
I thought the medical device decision was stupid, but I now see it for what it is, A way for the corporate douches that run this country to avoid any accountability for anything.
This in effect gives corporate person-hood a whole new meaning; essentially giving corporations more protection than actual people.
Sickening.

Shame on the Supreme Court

[pattmarty]

9. I love this shit, "on balance". WE ARE FUCKED!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[kirby]

10. Why not 12 doctors/peers on the jury instead? n/t

[Javaman]

11. No law suits means more drug testing on americans.

Has anyone see the wonderful movie, "the constant gardener"?

briefly, it's about testing drugs on Africans without their knowledge or consent.

The removal of law suits would basically fling the door open on this abusive tactic to take place here.

Granted, most of the "drugs" that are put out on the market today, aren't adequately tested to begin with, but any safeguards that are currently in place would be promptly ignored.

one more nail in the coffin of national health care.

now where did I put my SOMA?

[krkaufman]

12. If the public can't sue the FDA, then they must be allowed to sue those ...

... that the FDA is failing to monitor.

[HCE SuiGeneris]

13. Gov't immune, Telecoms immune, Pharma immune...

what's next? I can't take any more of this. I really can't.