Sen. Clay Yarborough’s proposal to fix a long-standing gap in state law that penalizes certain survivors of deaths at the hands of negligent doctors continues to move.

The Appropriations Committee on Health and Human Services is the latest panel to advance SB 734, which Yarborough calls a “clean repeal” of state statute — 768.21(8) — prohibiting adult children and their parents from collecting negligence and non-economic “pain and suffering” damages for medical malpractice.

Yarborough says the current state of play “singled out a narrow group of survivors who cannot recover non-economic damages in the case of a wrongful death due to medical negligence, even though the same damages can be recovered by survivors for a wrongful death that is caused by all other forms of negligence.”

Florida is the only state in the nation with the restriction on its books. Lawmakers passed it in 1990 when the state was trying to rein in increasing medical malpractice costs and attract more doctors to the state.

Yarborough stressed that most doctors do a good job.

“This is in no way a knock against the medical profession or anyone in it because Florida has some of the best health care providers and institutions in the country and beyond. I do not have a statistic to quote, but I will venture to say, we likely have a low single-digit percentage of those in Florida’s health care community that have issues with malpractice or negligence,” Yarborough said, framing his bill as being about “accountability” and “the value of life.”

More than two dozen speakers showed up with passionate cases for or against the legislation.

Opponents made the case that medical malpractice insurance has gotten more expensive and more difficult to procure in the last few years, so the pool of claimants should be expanded.

Tallahassee Memorial Hospital’s Judy Davis, a risk manager, said that “bad, unfortunate outcomes” do happen, but only 1 in 4 of them involve “some degree of negligence.”

“When physicians and hospitals have to pay large sums of money, it does reflect in higher insurance premiums,” Davis said.

Andy Bolin of the Florida Justice Civil Reform Institute said his clients “face the highest medical malpractice premiums” in the U.S. He argued that “infusing” new cases into the system would make that problem worse, and suggested that if the bill must go forward, damages need to be capped.

Associated Industries of Florida’s Adam Basford urged lawmakers to take a “holistic” view of the problem and “mitigate” the impact on providers.

The Florida Chamber’s Carolyn Johnson warned that the bill would increase litigation, insurance rates and health care costs, while decreasing access to care.

Proponents argued that survivors need the opportunity for compensation without caps.

Some told their personal stories of treatment deferred with horrible consequences and no recourse, while their advocates made the larger case for change.

AARP’s Karen Murillo said current law discriminates against older adults, arguing that people are being deprived of justice and rejecting the idea that this class of claimants should be held responsible for reducing liability for medical providers.

Ethan Perez described maltreatment for his grandfather that included injection with hydrogen peroxide, which an autopsy deemed to be “homicide,” but which was protected under current law.

“Civil lawsuits have an opportunity to reveal criminal wrongdoing,” Perez said, adding that his family is “being left without justice” due to the current “inhumane and barbaric” free kill law.

Lauren Korienko said her mother was found dead in a hospital bed, “covered with blood” after a minor surgery because medical professionals let her bleed to death over the course of 24 hours and succumb to septic shock. Her family was aghast to find they lacked recourse and protection under state law that makes Florida a “sanctuary for medical malpractice.”

Darcy McGill, another person who buried her mother after maltreatment, called Florida’s “free kill” law the state’s “dirty little secret.”

“I’ve yet to hear one good reason why my life is less valuable because I’m married and without children,” McGill said.

After the testimony, Senators diverged on whether the bill could work ahead of the bill moving forward.

Republican Sen. Gayle Harrell said the right move wasn’t this bill, but was to empower the Board of Medicine.

Republican Sen. Jason Brodeur said other states had these provisions without caps, so Florida should as well.

Democrat Sen. Darryl Rouson said the passage of the bill would be a “milestone moment” for people without recourse until now.

__

Jesse Scheckner of Florida Politics contributed to this report.

Post Views: 0

Top Democrats on the House Judiciary and House Oversight committees have filed a lengthy Freedom of Information Act request questioning whether the Trump administration’s DOGE Service is operating “outside the bounds of federal law,” The Associated Press has learned.

U.S. Reps. Jamie Raskin of Maryland and Gerald Connolly of Virginia are seeking detailed information about the authority of the Department of Government Efficiency Service, including billionaire Trump adviser Elon Musk and some 40 other people, to carry out firings of federal workers and dismantling of federal agencies.

They also are requesting detailed information about DOGE’s access to sensitive data, its use of artificial intelligence, the resumes and training of its staff and its communications related to Musk-held entities including SpaceX, Starlink and Tesla.

“The Administration and Mr. Musk have hidden behind a veil of secrecy as they systematically dismantle the federal government of the United States,” the Democrats wrote in a letter to DOGE Administrator Amy Gleason accompanying the FOIA request, which was obtained by the AP. “The American people deserve answers, and we are committed to using every tool at our disposal to expose the truth about DOGE’s operations.”

They are seeking expedited review of the request, with a response within 20 days.

The FOIA request is the latest in an escalating confrontation between Congress and the executive branch as President Donald Trump is rapidly slashing routine aspects of the federal government by doing away with thousands of workers and unwinding various longstanding agencies and services.

While generally anyone can file a FOIA request, the Democrats on the panels are utilizing the avenues at their disposal as the minority party to press for oversight of the Republican administration any way they can. It’s also a potential step toward more binding measures, including legal action.

In the FOIA request, Raskin and Connolly, who are the ranking Democrats on the committees, wrote that the information is necessary “to provide answers to the many open questions and an explanation to the public.”

They said, “There exist possible questions concerning the government’s integrity regarding DOGE’s operations, formation, and activity, which form the basis of this request, as many of DOGE’s actions may be outside the bounds of federal law.”

It’s unclear if the Trump administration will respond.

Trump and Musk have shown little regard for the protests coming from Democrats — and some Republicans — in Congress as their teams march across the federal government. Musk has vowed transparency, but the Democrats noted he has met privately with House and Senate Republicans.

The Trump administration is purging employees, shuttering federal agencies and otherwise disrupting operations in the name of rooting out waste, fraud and abuse. Some 100 lawsuits have been filed, with judges slowing and stopping some actions, while allowing others.

In the sweeping request, the Democrats seek four main types of information about the authority involved with DOGE’s activity: its access to sensitive data; the guidance and decision-making around its firings of federal employees; the potential conflicts of interest around its leadership; and its internal communications.

They seek the names, job titles and qualifications of DOGE staffers who have “been granted access to personally identifiable or sensitive information” since inauguration day, Jan. 20, and their purpose for doing so.

Additionally, they want to know about the various computer programs, including but “not limited to, artificial intelligence (AI) and large language models (LLMs), your agency is using to store, process or analyze personally identifiable or sensitive information or data.”

The request seeks all DOGE directives, guidance and analyses around the firing of federal workers, including the dismissal of Inspectors General, and the undoing of various government agencies, including the U.S. Agency for International Development, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, the Department of Education and others.

Democrats are also requesting information about DOGE’s authority to direct and execute these directives as well as details around the funding of DOGE operations.

Musk, DOGE Administrator Gleason and some 40 other employees are listed in the FOIA request, which seeks information about their resumes, salaries, any conflict of interest waivers and any non-disclosure agreements involving their employment.

The request also seeks all communication from those workers, including via text message, and various messaging platforms, and specifically around key words including Musk-related entities SpaceX, Starlink, Twitter, Tesla and others.

___

Republished with permission of The Associated Press.

Post Views: 0