Although it has been attempted to overturn the ruling in the Helling case, I would suppose that these attempts have been unsuccessful because the ruling was in favor of a higher standard of care than what was deemed appropriate by for the ophthalmologists. One might argue that the ruling has remained in place because holding the defendants liable was, in a way, a step towards checking the medical profession’s privilege to set it’s own standards. I feel as though legislature has probably not seen fit to reinforce it because the original ruling remains valid in that a doctor can follow all of the standards of care, and still be liable.
