While I want to agree with you, the sad thing is in our current legal climate it's often faster and cheaper to just settle than to take it to trial, fight it there, quite possibly need to fight an appeal, etc. And most doctors probably don't even bother thinking about the occasional malpractice claim these days, as they just bounce it to their malpractice insurance to deal with.
Are you gonna dig up every complaint on a contractor or whatever kind of business owner? If so, I think that belongs in the realm of politics, not law. Whoever is elected should be able to serve. If something personally disqualifies them to you, then you don't have to vote for them. The whole point is that people get the information and can make informed judgements. Though I seriously doubt most people are capable of that in this kind of case.
Any malpractice claims settled should disqualify a person from this post. If the claim was without merit, that would have been settled at trial.
While I want to agree with you, the sad thing is in our current legal climate it's often faster and cheaper to just settle than to take it to trial, fight it there, quite possibly need to fight an appeal, etc. And most doctors probably don't even bother thinking about the occasional malpractice claim these days, as they just bounce it to their malpractice insurance to deal with.
Then that doctor should know that they forfeit the chance for such an authoritative position. Opportunity cost.
Are you gonna dig up every complaint on a contractor or whatever kind of business owner? If so, I think that belongs in the realm of politics, not law. Whoever is elected should be able to serve. If something personally disqualifies them to you, then you don't have to vote for them. The whole point is that people get the information and can make informed judgements. Though I seriously doubt most people are capable of that in this kind of case.
No, just the ones who make decisions affecting my health such as the mandating of mrna shots.