Medical malpractice verdicts determine whether or not the plaintiff receives compensation and how much compensation. The determination on how much compensation of often overridden by state caps, if they are in place. The argument has been made, and rightfully so that juries involved in medical malpractice cases need to be medical experts, not laymen who understand very little of what is being argued. In fact, due to most juries being made up of non-medical field individuals, often decisions are based on the emotions conjured up when people see an injured person. Studies have shown that most negligently injured people don't go to court and most medical malpractice winners were not victims or true negligence. For example, cerebral palsy is a truly sad medical condition that wrenches at the heart strings; however, most cerebral palsy cases are caused by genetic abnormalities or maternal infections ﾖ facts backed up by doctors, and the March of Dimes. Yet, when a victim of cerebral palsy is wheeled into a courtroom, juries become instantly sympathetic and tend to award huge sums of money. Medical malpractice verdicts need to be based totally and completely on medical facts, not on sympathetic feelings. Having medically qualified jurors would reduce this and would increase the chance of truly negligent cases being brought to court.