Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Medical Apology Law topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
‘I’m sorry’ bill divides doctors and trial lawyers in House Judiciary hearing
Summary
House Bill 7,548 would make expressions of sympathy or apologies by health‑care providers inadmissible as evidence of liability. Hospital and physician groups supported the measure as restoring compassionate communication; trial‑lawyer witnesses warned it could obscure evidence and complicate malpractice litigation.
House Bill 7,548, introduced by Chairwoman Fogarty, would make statements by health‑care providers about an unanticipated outcome — including apologies or expressions of sympathy — inadmissible as evidence of liability or as statements against interest.
Supporters — including Care New England, Kent Hospital, and the Rhode Island Medical Society — told the committee the statute would allow clinicians to respond to patients with compassion without fearing those words could be used later in court. "In those moments, people don't need just facts. They actually need humanity," said Dr. Nadine Himmelfarb, president of the Rhode Island Medical Society. She described a "chilling effect" in which clinicians withhold empathy for fear of future litigation.
Hospital counsel and nursing leaders emphasized workforce pressures. Mary McBurney of Care New England told lawmakers the bill is a "need for doctors," not a gift to lawyers, arguing that physicians already face intense professional regulation. Sherry Sprague, chief nursing officer at Kent Hospital, said the measure restores humanity to medicine and does not prevent lawsuits, only limits use of brief sympathetic statements as admissions.
Opponents, chiefly from the plaintiffs' bar, disputed the claimed benefits and warned the bill could shield evidence. Jeff Mega, president of the Rhode Island Association for Justice, said jurors are well equipped to evaluate the meaning of an apology and argued the bill could encourage partial, strategic statements that mislead families. "What's not going to happen... is the doctor walks into the room after a loved one died and says, 'I'm really sorry we messed up' — that's what it's going to encourage," he said.
Committee members pressed both sides on empirical evidence and on whether the proposed language is narrower or broader than other states' apology statutes. Testimony indicated 39 states have some form of apology law, but witnesses said statutory language and protections vary. The committee ended testimony and will consider the measure further.
