Value of something does not depend on the what the provider is providing but what are the alternatives for the consumers. A brilliant doctor who saves someone'

Value of something does not depend on the what the provider is providing but what are the alternatives for the consumers. A brilliant doctor who saves someone's life should be awarded lifetime earnings of the person if the alternative is dying. Clearly people already spend a fortune getting state of art medical care for the same reason. Value depends on alternatives and not on what a doctor is doing. Also a lot of medical errors are because doctors can get away with it or they have simply too high egos to go through a checklist. Penalizing doctors is important for their mistakes. But I do agree to your point that there is no clear way of determining what is good compensation. Sometimes death destroys one life, disability destroys many lives. I think the jury must determine what the compensation is.