posted by madamejune on May 31
The U.S. Supreme Court is considering a review current laws that protect military hospitals from lawsuits arising from medical errors, a South Carolina law firm reported earlier this week.
Unknown to many Americans, in many states military personnel cannot claim damages for harm and injury caused by a military physician’s or hospital’s medical mistakes. The Feres Doctrine, established in 1950 out of a Supreme Court ruling, classifies malpractice injuries as combat wounds and thus protects doctors from legal liability.
New case proceedings may soon change the rules, however. In 2003, during a routine appendectomy on Air Force Staff Sgt. Dean Patrick Witt, a nurse anesthetist inserted a breathing tube into the patient’s esophagus instead of the trachea, depriving his brain of oxygen for up to 10 minutes and causing irreversible brain damage. After a few months on life support, Sgt. Witt’s family decided to pull the plugs as there was no hope of recovery.
Mrs. Witt’s medical negligence claim was denied in 2008 on the basis of the Feres Doctrine. She then took the case to the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California, citing the Federal Tort Claims Act and alleging that the nurse anesthetist committed gross medical negligence that led to the sergeant’s death.
The case was again dismissed in 2009, despite the District Court’s acknowledgment that in this case the malpractice was blatantly obvious and the Feres Doctrine was unfair and “wrongheaded.” Mrs. Witt then took the case to the Ninth Circuit United States Court of Appeals, arguing that the doctrine was unconstitutional.
Among her main arguments were that excluding citizens on active military duty from the right to fair medical practice directly violates the Constitution’s Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments, which advocate equal protection. The Feres Doctrine, she added, allows courts to override Congressional views and thus goes against constitutional separation of powers.
When the case was again decided in favor of the Feres Doctrine, with the Court of Appeals noticeably skirting the constitutional claims, Mrs. Witt turned to what is perhaps her last legal alternative: filing a petition for certoriari, which is essentially asking the Supreme Court to review the case.
The Witt case is widely considered a trailblazer for military personnel and their families, and has sparked almost unanimous criticism of the Feres Doctrine. The Supreme Court has already ordered more information on the case and is expected to announce its decision soon, including whether or not to review Mrs. Witt’s other allegations on the constitutionality of current laws.
