Realistically if someone is injured by a doctor or a hospital (I'm referring to something that is not a known risk that the individual signed off on before receiving the treatment or surgery) and that injury precludes them from working and supporting themselves for the rest of their life, I think it is fair to award an amount in damages equal to what would have been their lifetime earnings plus a little padding for the stress of it all and any future medical or mental care that may be required due to the injury. Anything above that is just ridiculous.

So you support the right to sue for negligence, with the option for punitive damages if care is particularly cavalier? FWIW I'd be happy to see multi-million $ awards against a facility/surgeon that cuts off the wrong limb or removes a 30-year-old woman's ovaries that was supposed to be done on another patient, but if there is a 1% infection rate and you're unfortunate enough to be the 1% and the hospital's results meet all the standards, suing them isn't the proper way to insure yourself against adverse effects.