Litigation avoidance is based on considering the possibility of that one person who might construct a legal case out of the situation. Advocates of more legal redress often argue that litigation creates more accountability. But faced with the possibility that words and actions might be read into a legal claim, organisations are forced to become more secretive. Where, for example, peer-reviewed journals were a useful way for pharmaceutical and medical organisations to openly review the efficacy of therapies, they have become a potential liability by exposing recognised problems and weaknesses in existing technology. The consequences of this are to close down a very important exchange of information.
Litigation does restrict behaviour, but in the worst possible way.
Litigation, and its implied liability for others, is quite arbitrary in whom it punishes and awards, and its consequences for behaviour are very damaging. Litigation avoidance makes all professional advice unhelpful because professionals do not relish the idea of being held responsible in a litigious climate. The only advice now available in some quarters is to seek more advice. I discovered this recently when my young son was struck down with a virus. On consulting the child health manual to determine whether medical intervention was necessary, I discovered that even diagnoses of the mildest infection carried the rider that it was advisable to consult a doctor.