A Lesson From the Medical Profession

When mea culpas earn real forgiveness work in the Court of Public Opinion, they do so in various ways and for various reasons.

To be sure, big-news apologies comprise a variegated lot. Maybe it’s Richard Nixon getting people to forgive him in his famous “Checkers” speech. Maybe it’s actor Hugh Grant offering his contrition to “Tonight Show” viewers for soliciting a prostitute. Or maybe it’s U.S. Army General George Weightman apologizing to a soldier for the mistreatment he suffered at Walter Reed Hospital.

One particularly important recent species of apology has actually been translated into law. More and more states are recognizing that, when a doctor makes a mistake, the words “I’m sorry” can defuse patients’ anger and ward off expensive litigation. It all began with a healthcare movement called “Sorry Works,” the subsequent impact of which may have surpassed expectations all around.

In fact, 27 states now have laws that protect doctors from liability for the mistakes they publicly acknowledge. Nine other states are currently considering similar “Sorry Works” legislation. On the federal level, Senators Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton have co-sponsored national “I’m sorry” legislation.

At first blush, the idea might seem counter-intuitive even when encouraged by specific indemnifications. Yet consider the Veterans Administration Hospital, in Lexington, Ky., which suffered through two multimillion-dollar law suits in the 1980s. Afterward, hospital administrators and lawyers established a policy whereby the institution and its staff would apologize to patients and families (and include some reasonable compensation as well) for all medical errors.

By the end of the 1990s, hospital staff reported that their institution ranked among the lowest of all VA facilities for med-mal pay-outs. 

It’s hard to imagine that the Lexington policy is not adaptable at other healthcare institutions. Going further, Sorry Works would also seem to also have broader implications for American businesses that, in certain scenarios, may lower the risk of litigation by formally apologizing for product defects, accidents, business operation snafus, etc.

We are not very far from the example of railway giant CSX, which handed out $100 checks by way of an apology after a derailment snarled local traffic. There too, the volume of subsequent litigation was judged to be much less than if the company had not taken this penitential approach.

Corporations may or may not want to move toward actually formalizing an apology policy but, in an era of tort reform and public impatience with litigation abuses, the idea of legislating Sorry Works for businesses outside the healthcare arena is certainly worth considering.

In light of the widespread and bipartisan support for Sorry Works, consider assigning an agent in your legal, PR, or government relations departments to monitor the developments of both state and federal Sorry Works legislation. Analyze how this fast-growing movement might be applied to your industry, and what a Sorry Works bill might look like if applied to your products, services, customers, and recurrent causes of action.

Be mindful that you’ll always have to be careful about exactly what you’re saying “I’m sorry” for. Apologies can be dangerous. Vet each situation with both your legal and communications counselors. That said, right now, it’s typical for companies in crisis to apologize in hopes of being forgiven in the Court of Public Opinion. Imagine if they could hope for the same on the legal front as well.