Opinion: The dangerous consequences of HB503 — why Utah cannot afford to cap medical malpractice damages
As the president of the Utah Association for Justice, I represent 475 dedicated members who advocate for individuals harmed by negligence. Today, I write with deep concern about HB503, a misguided proposal that would impose severe limits on the rights of Utahns who suffer due to medical malpractice.
HB503 seeks to cap all damages in medical malpractice claims at $1,000,000. While I believe the bill's proponents are well-intentioned, this arbitrary cap would have devastating consequences for victims and their families. To put it bluntly, a one-size-fits-all cap fails to account for the true costs of catastrophic injuries. If the thought of this cap conjures images of Dr. Evil sneering, 'One million dollars,' you are not alone. And, just like in the Austin Powers movies, that amount in today's world is insufficient.
For many victims, $1,000,000 is simply not enough to cover past and future medical expenses — let alone the long-term suffering and financial instability that result from severe injuries. Utah has not historically imposed limits on damages related to past and future medical expenses in malpractice cases. This recognition of fairness and justice has ensured that those harmed by medical malpractice can afford the care they need to recover and obtain continued medical care, if necessary.
Consider this: Utah currently imposes a cap of $450,000 on non-economic damages (pain and suffering) in medical malpractice cases — a figure set in 2010. For perspective, a dozen eggs cost around $1.66 at that time. Today, the average price is $4.15 — more than 150% higher. If we applied a similar adjustment to the 2010 cap, victims would now be entitled to $1,125,000 for pain and suffering alone, in addition to their past and future medical expenses. Yet HB503 would impose an arbitrary $1,000,000 limit for everything, disregarding inflation and the true financial needs of victims.
Fundamentally, our legal system is built on personal responsibility, fairness and accountability. One of the bedrock principles of our republic is that those who are harmed by the actions of others are entitled to recompense and the opportunity to be made whole. Utahns pride themselves on personal responsibility, self-autonomy and community accountability. But HB503 exempts a specific class — medical professionals — from that basic principle. Like lawyers and clergy, doctors hold a position of immense trust and responsibility in society. If their actions result in harm, they must be held accountable like all others. No profession should receive special immunity from the consequences of its actions.
The real-world impact of HB503 would be tragic. Imagine a child left paralyzed due to a surgical error or a young mother requiring lifelong medical care after a botched procedure. HB503 shields medical professionals from full responsibility, regardless of the severity of harm they cause. No matter how devastating the consequences — whether a lifetime of disability, catastrophic financial ruin or the wrongful death of a loved one — the cap would remain the same. Such a policy is not only unjust, but also contrary to the principles of personal responsibility, fairness and accountability that Utahns hold dear.
When we strip individuals of their ability to seek full and fair compensation for life-altering injuries, we erode the very foundation of our society. We diminish personal responsibility, weaken community trust and compromise the well-being of those who suffer the most. This is not justice.
I urge every Utahn to review the proposed legislation. Then, ask yourself: If you or a loved one were injured due to medical negligence, would one million dollars truly be enough to cover your pain, suffering and lifelong medical expenses? Is your life, health and ability to provide for your family worth more than that arbitrary figure? Should the law prioritize the financial interests of insurance companies over the well-being of injured patients?
HB503 does not serve justice, and it does not serve Utahns. We must reject this harmful legislation and stand for accountability, fairness and the rights of those who need justice the most.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
4 days ago
- Yahoo
Intermountain Health launches cancer treatment program for patients with advanced melanoma skin cancer
SALT LAKE CITY, Utah (ABC4 Utah) – May is Melanoma Awareness Month and Intermountain Health is unveiling an exciting new treatment program for Utahns with advanced melanoma cancer – the first time local patients have been treated with this advanced technology and new therapy in the Beehive State. Thanks to this new cutting-edge personalized cancer treatment program, Utahns who have advanced melanoma cancer no longer have to leave the state to get a groundbreaking new treatment that is showing promise for patients with the deadliest type of skin cancer. Intermountain Health has launched a new program to provide tumor-infiltrating lymphocyte (TIL) therapy to treat patients with a type of skin cancer called unresectable or metastatic melanoma that cannot be removed surgically or has spread to other parts of the body. It is the first time this therapy has been used to treat patients in Utah. This novel therapy works by using special immune cells, called lymphocytes, which are taken from the tumor itself. These cells are then multiplied in a lab and put back into the patient's body to help fight the cancer. As part of the treatment process, doctors use AMTAGVI, the first and only FDA-approved prescription medication for the treatment of advanced melanoma that has not responded to standard therapies. AMTAGVI activates the patient's own immune system to target and destroy cancer cells and represents a different approach compared to other immunotherapies. Instead of broadly stimulating the immune system, it harnesses a patient's own tumor-specific T cells to directly target and destroy cancer cells. Intermountain Health cancer experts say the groundbreaking treatment marks a significant advancement in the fight against advanced melanoma, offering a new option for patients with limited treatment alternatives. 'We're excited to offer this advanced therapy and the hope it provides for improved outcomes for patients who have not responded to standard therapies,' said Tawnya Bowles, MD, a surgical oncologist at Intermountain Health. 'The promise for patients is that this treatment will work against their advanced melanoma when other treatments have failed. These patients do not have as many treatment options once their tumor has progressed on standard treatments. This therapy offers new hope for these patients.' TIL therapy has been used for decades, but AMTAGVI allows the treatment to extend beyond select treatment centers by using a protocol that lets a patient's tumor T cells grow at centralized facilities in the United States. Previously, only limited academic facilities with lab facilities could grow and expand the T cells. For Utahns, having the therapy program available locally is a major advancement. Not only does Utah have the highest incidence of melanoma in the nation, but until now, Utahns needing TIL therapy had to travel out of state for their care. 'Each year we see Utah patients who need this next step of treatment for advanced melanoma, and these patients previously had to leave the state and incur the expense of travel and the increased stress of being away from home,' said Caroline Nebhan, MD, PhD, Intermountain Health medical oncologist. 'We're thrilled to be able to offer this advanced treatment close to home with our Intermountain Health oncology team.' Patients in the new Intermountain treatment program are supported by a multi-disciplinary team of clinicians, including oncology experts and patient navigators, who work closely with patients throughout their treatment. The therapy involves surgically removing a sample of the patient's tumor, from which tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) are extracted. These TILs, which are immune cells capable of recognizing and attacking cancer cells, are then sent to a specialized manufacturing facility where they are expanded and multiplied into billions of cells. Once the manufacturing process is complete (approximately 34 days), the patient undergoes a short course of lymphodepleting chemotherapy to prepare their body for the infusion of the expanded TILs. Following the AMTAGVI infusion, patients may receive several doses of interleukin-2 (IL-2) to further stimulate the activity and growth of the infused T cells. Patients are cared for in the hospital for a period to monitor for potential side effects. Research results of the medication were promising. Clinical trial data supporting FDA approval of AMTAGVI demonstrated promising response rates and, in many cases, prolonged outcomes in patients with advanced melanoma, suggesting the potential for long-term control of the disease. 'We're committed to providing our patients with access to the most advanced and innovative cancer treatments,' said Dr. Bowles. 'The addition of AMTAGVI to our comprehensive oncology program underscores this commitment and offers new hope for patients battling advanced melanoma.' To learn more about cancer care at Intermountain Health, go to Close Thanks for signing up! Watch for us in your inbox. Subscribe Now Sponsored by Intermountain Health. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
5 days ago
- Yahoo
The Pride Month ‘vibe shift' comes to Utah. Can Utahns find common ground this June?
Utah Gov. Spencer Cox broke with his party this week as the only Republican governor to make a statement in response to what some celebrate as Pride Month during the month of June. But he also broke from his own custom. Instead of officially declaring June 'Pride Month' — as he had his first three years in office — Cox released a simple message, similar to last year's declaration, about the importance of seeking unity and compassion. 'This June I'm reflecting on the values that bring us together here in Utah — service, respect, and love for our neighbor," Cox said in a post on X. 'To those celebrating Pride and to all Utahns: may we keep building bridges of understanding and strive always to see the humanity in one another.' As has become a common feature of the polarized discourse on social media, Cox's statement earned the ire of LGBTQ activists, for not officially recognizing Pride Month, and conservative influencers, for acknowledging the occasion at all. While it may have failed to please partisans on both sides of the spectrum, the governor's message might point to a better way to strengthen a pluralistic society, according to Paul Edwards, director of the Wheatley Institute at Brigham Young University. A focus on personal bridge-building can transcend the conflict between divisive diversity, equity and inclusion efforts that amplify identity politics, and a rigid affirmation of traditional values that ignores cultural differences, Edwards said. 'It's vital that we get this right because we do need to live together in some kind of peace,' Edwards said in an interview with the Deseret News. 'And that is possible, probably in more ways than we sometimes believe.' This year has seen a number of organizations — public and private — back away from their previously open endorsements of Pride Month celebrations. The Utah Transit Authority will not participate in this year's Pride parade for the first time since 2022 as part of a temporary hold to ensure 'consistency and responsible stewardship of public funds,' according to a UTA spokesperson. Likewise, the University of Utah has discontinued its official sponsorship of the downtown Salt Lake City Pride celebration, which it had supported for 'several years,' according to a university spokesperson. The university will still encourage students to join its entry in the parade and continues to hold a 'Pride Week' every spring while students are on campus, featuring a fundraising 'gayla' and 'Drag Bingo.' These changes in Pride participation follow a series of steps taken by state lawmakers to restrict some transgender treatments for minors, prevent exclusionary DEI practices at government entities and prohibit most flags in public schools. But they also come amid what some are proclaiming a 'vibe shift‚" or cultural realignment away from socially liberal stances. After years of touting their support of Pride, corporations like Comcast, Anheuser-Busch and Nissan have pulled funding from Pride festivals across the country; organizations like Target have swapped rainbow decorations for American flags; and the Trump administration has officially declared June 'Title IX Month.' 'There's a massive vibe shift,' anti-DEI activist Robby Starbuck told the Deseret News. 'The public-facing things they used to do like Pride logos on their social media, or company-wide emails are no longer happening.' Policy changes like this can be attributed to a backlash among Americans, many of them parents, who believe 'symbols matter' when it comes to the places they will spend their money, according to Starbuck. But, he acknowledged, it is also the result of partisan activism, like his own, that verbally attacks, shames and boycotts organizations for taking a public position on an increasingly politicized issue. This year Starbuck has mobilized a group of supporters to film Pride parades around the country to document 'inappropriate behavior that occurs in view of children' and then to link the events to the companies sponsoring them. 'What you tolerate, in many ways, becomes who you are,' Starbuck said. 'However you bring about that change to bring something positive to the forefront, I don't think that really matters.' One state lawmaker, Rep. Trevor Lee, R-Layton, has drafted a bill for next session that would wield state power to discourage private organizations from announcing support of messages like Pride Month if they receive public subsidies. Lee, the primary sponsor of the 2024 law banning political flags in classrooms and on government flagpoles, told the Deseret News the bill in its current form would make taxpayer dollars in public-private partnerships contingent on organizations remaining politically neutral. Lee teased the legislation during a social media spat over the weekend where he criticized Pride Month posts from the Utah Jazz and Utah Mammoth — both owned by Smith Entertainment Group which is set to receive nearly $1 billion in public funds to revitalize parts of downtown. 'This isn't necessarily about Pride,' Lee said. 'It's about political neutrality.' Marina Lowe, the policy director of one of Utah's largest LGBTQ advocacy organizations, Equality Utah, slammed Lee's proposal as 'unAmerican' and 'anti-conservative,' arguing that it violates the First Amendment by telling private businesses what speech they can use. From her point of view, Pride Month and the rainbow flag shouldn't be considered political in the first place; they represent 'a celebration of love, community, getting to be oneself authentically,' Lowe said. What the so-called 'vibe shift' really shows, whether it be in statements from public officials or support from corporations, is how intense polarization, which stirs outrage across the political spectrum, has chilled free expression, Lowe said. 'That is sort of the world that we're living in right now, that it's impossible to take positions on things without that being weaponized against one side or the other,' Lowe said. 'We do need to get to a better place of healthy pluralism, where we all can coexist and work together, despite the fact that we have differences and differences of opinions about topics.' On Friday, standing in front of the City and County Building, Salt Lake City Mayor Erin Mendenhall launched Pride Month by raising a Progress Pride Flag imprinted with the city's logo. A month earlier, the altered version of Salt Lake City's flag was officially adopted in a successful move to skirt the Legislature's new law prohibiting local governments from flying most flags. In her speech, Mendenhall said the 'new Sego Belonging Flag' celebrates 'the diversity of the LGBTQ community' and 'does not exclude others.' However, several conservative constituents took to social media to express anger that the city would continue to promote a message that many Utahns feel conflicts with their deeply held beliefs about family, identity and sexuality. One Utah leader, who understands both sides of the Pride Month debate, said there is a way for all Utahns, regardless of whether 'Pride' encourages or offends them, to be intentional about reaching out to others. The Rev. Marian Edmonds-Allen is a gay pastor based in Ogden who directs a group called Parity, an international nonprofit that works to heal 'LGBT and faith divides,' and who played a significant role in shaping Utah's 2015 'Utah Compromise,' that balanced LGBTQ anti-discrimination protections with religious freedom rights. More recently, her organization completed a pilot program with students and faculty from Brigham Young University called 'Faith, Hope, and Love' that aims to help religious individuals 'stand strong in their faith and convictions while maintaining a posture of compassion and grace in relationship with LGBT individuals.' 'Often someone knows a person who is LGBT, either at their workplace or in their family or their neighborhood, it's a wonderful time to say, 'Thinking of you and your family,'' the Rev. Edmonds-Allen said. 'It doesn't need to mention Pride or LGBT, but just being friendly to someone.' In her experience, Utah has been 'a shining light' in demonstrating what the Rev. Edmonds-Allen calls 'covenantal pluralism,' the idea that people of faith can hold firm to their religious beliefs while still being able to interact with someone who believes differently. Far from being a softening of one's beliefs, the Rev. Edmonds-Allen views this intentional cultivation of pluralism as 'a fundamental principle of Christianity.' It is also one of the core 'responsibilities of citizenship,' according to BYU's Paul Edwards. As the excesses of DEI have elicited an equally 'dogmatic' response in the opposite direction, Edwards believes it is more important than ever for Americans 'to try to understand our fellow citizens.' 'There's just too many sharp elbows out there right now and hurtful words,' Edwards said. 'We all love this great state and this great country, and let's find ways to honor that and not be seeking for ways to be offended by a word or a flag.'
Yahoo
5 days ago
- Yahoo
Utah attorneys sanctioned by appeals court for using AI to write legal brief
Two Utah attorneys were sanctioned after the Utah Court of Appeals found that they violated procedural rules for lawyers by citing cases that did not exist and appeared to have been created through artificial intelligence. The court's opinion says this is the first time Utah courts have addressed using AI when preparing legal documents. The judges said in the document that the use of reliable AI tools is not improper in itself, but the Utah Rules of Civil Procedure require attorneys to ensure their filings are accurate. 'The legal profession must be cautious of AI due to its tendency to hallucinate information. While technology continues to evolve, attorneys must verify each source,' the appellate judges said. Here, it said the attorneys 'fell short of their gatekeeping responsibilities as members of the Utah State Bar' when citing fake cases generated by ChatGPT. Richard Bednar and Douglas Durban, representing Matthew Garner, filed a petition asking the appellate court to review a decision of the 3rd District Court. When the attorneys on the other side of the dispute responded, they found the petition cited multiple cases that either didn't exist or were not applicable. In response, those attorneys stated that it appeared the petition could be AI-generated and cited at least one case they could only find by searching ChatGPT. They also stated that the petition contained references that were 'wholly unrelated' to the case. Bednar, who filed and signed the petition, was ordered not only to pay the opposing party's attorneys' fees for the time spent responding to a petition that included AI, but to refund his own client any fees associated with his filing of the petition. He was also ordered to pay $1,000 to "and Justice for all" a Utah nonprofit that works to provide equal access to justice and courts for Utahns. The Court of Appeals stated that it reviewed sanctions in other legal jurisdictions for attorneys citing 'hallucinated authority,' and believes the sanctions are appropriate. A hearing was scheduled for April 22 to give the attorneys the chance to argue why they should not be sanctioned. In a request to amend their petition filed before the hearing, Bednar and Durbano apologized for the errors and offered to pay the other party's attorneys' fees associated with their response. At the hearing, an attorney representing Bednar and Durbano explained that it was a law clerk who used ChatGPT to create the document, not Bednar; however, Bednar mistakenly trusted that someone else had checked the citations. The attorney said Bednar does take responsibility, although he was unaware that ChatGPT was being used until after the opposing attorneys brought it to his attention. He said his clients would voluntarily pay the opposing attorneys' fees to cover their efforts to respond to the petition. In their May 22 ruling, Utah's appellate judges stated that they appreciate the attorneys' acceptance of responsibility, but the lack of care is still an abuse of the justice system and caused harm. The opinion noted that other attorneys had to spend extra resources to research and judges were required to address this issue instead of other pending cases. The opinion further states that opposing counsel and Utah's courts cannot be responsible for independently verifying the validity of each citation. 'This court takes the submission of fake precedent seriously,' it said. 'Our system of justice must be able to rely on attorneys complying with their duty.' The case that included the first instance of AI use in Utah courts is a contract case filed by Matthew Garner against Kadince, a software company in North Ogden. He was a shareholder and employee at the company beginning in January 2016, when he was named chief experience officer. In his complaint, Garner claims that in December 2019, when he owned 30% of the company's shares, he was told that he would have to relinquish the majority of his shares or his employment would be terminated. He did relinquish the shares but later realized the employees who had threatened him were breaching his employment agreement by threatening to end his employment without giving him three formal written warnings, according to the complaint. He filed the lawsuit in February 2020. Kadince denied Garner's claims, asked for his lawsuit to be dismissed and claimed that he breached his contract with them by filing the lawsuit. Ultimately, the appellate judges denied both Garner's petition for appeal of a discovery issue and attorney fees order — the petition that included inaccurate citations — and his attorneys' request to allow them to file a new petition. The case will continue as if the appeal had not been filed.
