Legal Remedies

New laws often begin with good intentions and end with unexpected unfavorable consequences. Writing really good laws is hard work.

To protect insurance companies for unscrupulous clients with false or exaggerated claims laws were passed to limit legal remedies and monetary awards. Sounds reasonable, but the effect is that law firms make less and most stop taking clients.

The problem is that only a small number of people were abusng the system. The remedy not only limits the damage of fraud, but hurts millions of clients with reasonable claims.

To protect financial institutions we've made laws that limit the rights of individuals to file bankruptcy because some individuals abused the system, running up debts knowing they could clean the slate.

The problem is that many, many more people get into financial trouble due to unforeseen changes (job loss, medical costs). They, too suffer under tighter bankruptcy rules that keep them from meaningful help.

Recently a couple of women told me of the terrible abuse and neglect they experienced working with kids as advocates. They agreed the experience made them wonder whether forced sterilization might be a good thing.

While it is true that a woman who endangers her babies by taking drugs shouldn't have more babies, but the devil is always in the details. How bad does a mother have to be to permanently lose her ability to have babies in the future?

How can you define every situation within the law or if not that, who will sit as judge saying this person loses fertility permanently and this one doesn't?