I did not state that a national health service was impossible to sue, just that it is harder to sue; as especially with democratic processes dictating service l

I did not state that a national health service was impossible to sue, just that it is harder to sue; as especially with democratic processes dictating service levels, those same processes will also have to dictate operational mechanics to make sure everything is being done "by the book" (and "sustainable", according to some central regulatory body). Ultimately if a provider can prove they were following the letter of the regulations, their culpability is diffused back to the regulatory authority, and their liability diminished. I was not targeting the British NHS, in fact, I didn't mention it. However, I would point out that: > the idea that someone might go untreated perhaps for years for a quickly treatable illness, because going to hospital would bankrupt them, is seen as abhorrent and barbaric. Is not the same as having a rare condition. You have added (1) quickly treatable, and are assuming (2) easy to diagnose.