When I blogged about on the new form of liability mentioned in the WSJ health blog, I hadn’t noticed this entry at Overlawyered.com.  I want to point out the similarities in perspective (you will have to trust me that I didn’t read these comments before I wrote my own) as to what will result in holding doctors responsible for the damage done by their patients for ignoring potential side effects of their meds:

The obvious dynamic result from this gigantic expansion of liability, unnoted by the majority: doctors will simply overwarn, and tell all of their patients not to drive. (After all, patients can’t sue their doctors for the damages caused by their being unable to drive.) Some patients will routinely ignore the advice because they won’t be able to distinguish the legitimate warnings from the defensive warnings; other patients will stop taking medication that they should be taking because of the additional unnecessary personal costs; still other patients who could have driven safely will impose huge costs because they obey the defensive warning. None of these indirect expenses caused by the expansion of liability will be measured in accounts of the costs of the tort system.

I highlighted that last sentence because it is something important that I forgot about.  The costs being imposed by this medical malpractice liability will not be calculated or measured, even though they will be real.