For as long as I’ve practiced law, nearly 50 years, Florida has had one of the most controversial, unjust laws in the history of this country. It is known as the “Free Kill” Law.

Florida Statute (Section 768.21) states that only spouses and minor children of a decedent can bring a medical malpractice claim when that malpractice causes a patient’s death. If your retired grandfather, a widower, takes up residence in Florida and is killed by medical malpractice, unless he has children under age 25, which is unlikely, or was married again, none of his adult children can bring a claim.

Likewise, if your 26-year-old child dies as a result of malpractice and is unmarried and with no children, the parents of that young person cannot bring a claim for malpractice intangible damages.

This leaves many wrongs without remedy. It has protected hospitals and doctors, in even the most egregious situations, with absolutely no accountability.

State Rep. Johanna López, D-Orlando, introduced a simple bill, HB 129, to correct this injustice and give Floridians the same rights as the rest of the nation. But Sen. Clay Yarborough, R-Jacksonville, amended a related bill, SB 248, to make Florida a “cheap kill” state by putting caps on intangible damages such as pain and suffering, mental anguish and loss of ability to enjoy life in all medical malpractice cases.

This is strictly the work of the insurance lobby to protect profits and has nothing to do with justice. If this modified bill passes, it will make medical malpractice cases similar to cases of sovereign immunity, where an insurance company has nothing to lose by going to trial. If the insurer knows that its worst exposure is $500,000, it may take a bad case to trial in the hope that it might get lucky and get a defense verdict.

So much for justice.

Richard D. Schuler, Jupiter

The writer is a board certified civil trial lawyer in Palm Beach County.

Anti-worker legislation

House Bill 433 is fraught with bad things for Florida workers.

This bill made it out of committee by a 9-4 party-line vote. Representatives such as Carolina Amesty of Orange County don’t want workers to earn a living wage in high-cost areas of Florida, and Rep. Tyler Sirois of Brevard doesn’t believe that workers need water breaks or shade time in the extreme Florida sun. HB 433 stops local governments from requiring businesses to pay living wages, provide minimum levels of benefits or ensure access to drinking water for employees working outdoors in extreme heat. It has the blessing of Florida anti-worker groups, such as Associated Industries of Florida and the Florida Chamber of Commerce. If you know of someone who might be affected by these anti-worker proposals, call your representatives. These harmful rules will only hurt the people they are alleged to represent. Shame on them!

PJ Whelan, Orlando

Spend, spend, spend

The Jan. 16 Sun Sentinel article, “Sheriff’s training center bigger, costlier,” struck me as disturbing and disappointing. Spending a potential $70 million on a police training facility boggles my mind.

Why is there apparently no meaningful oversight over these monetary expenditures of taxpayer money?

In reading the article, it appears that Sheriff Gregory Tony simply submitted his proposal with no real assessment of costs and their feasibility. No one asks what amount is reasonable. The final cost is ludicrous on its face. Does the Broward County Inspector General not see an obvious lack of checks and balances? To give you an idea of where I’m coming from as a taxpayer, I am close to having my job terminated through a reduction in force. That will leave me just one catastrophic car accident or serious medical condition away from being rendered homeless. I can’t afford the rising costs of paying a mortgage and associated costs along with the overall cost of living, yet this kind of money is spent with no apparent oversight in this economy.

Sheriff Tony has his heart in the right place, but he needs this project to be reigned in as far as costs. Someone needs to tell him that taxpayer money is not a blank check for expenditures. The public’s money needs to be spent within reasonable limits.

Bernard Burawski, Tamarac

(Editor’s Note: A Florida Supreme Court case, Alachua County v. Darnell, held that while county commissioners must approve a sheriff’s total budget, the sheriff has autonomy to transfer funds between accounts.)