Comparing access to legal and medical services illustrates the ambivalence of
society toward the provision of essential services. Most persons believe that
there is a basic right to medical treatment, a belief embodied in the extensive
state and federal systems for providing medical services to indigents. The
courts, however, have never accepted a constitutional right to medical care.
Conversely, while the U.S. Supreme Court has found a constitutional right to
legal services in several situations, society has provided only a rudimentary
system for providing legal services to those who cannot afford them.
In the criminal justice system, it has been recognized that a poor person
cannot exercise the right to effective counsel because of the expense. Lack of
representation so compromises a criminal defendant's rights that the U.S
Supreme Court requires all criminal defendants to have appointed counsel at
government expense, if the defendant is unable to pay a lawyer. The court has
not recognized a corresponding right to counsel in personal injury or business
litigation. There is no provision of legal services for matters such as
litigation to recover compensation for an injury. A person needing civil law
services must purchase them in the marketplace. For legal problems that do not
generate money, such as adoption proceedings or writing wills, a person either
pays the attorney's fees or does without the service. For potentially
money-generating situations, the contingent fee system has evolved (see Chapter
2).
The Medical and Public
Health Law Site
The Best on the WWW Since 1995!
Copyright as to non-public domain materials
See DR-KATE.COM for home disaster preparation
Edward P. Richards, III, JD, MPH Webmaster
