Turn on the TV late at night in the Lehigh Valley and you are likely to see them: lawsuit ads warning about prescription drugs or medical devices. These ads are designed to generate lawsuits, but new polling shows they are also generating fear that can put patients at risk.

Recently, President Trump issued a memo cracking down on drug advertising in an effort to protect patients when it comes to health information. If additional safeguards are seen as necessary in the world of prescription advertising, then the same attention should be given to trial lawyer advertising that directly impacts patients’ decisions about their care.

A recent national survey released by Patients Come First, a patient and consumer advocacy organization,found that two-thirds of Americans believe these ads make people unnecessarily fearful of medications that are safe when used as prescribed. Fewer than half, just 41%, say they are confident that law firm ads provide balanced and accurate information.

It turns out these ads people see on TV have serious unintended consequences, including giving the false impression that lawyers know more than doctors. This is not right, and patients deserve accurate, science-based information that should come from a health provider.

Misleading legal ads can have real consequences for the region. According to the Centers for DiseaseControl and Prevention, more than seven in 10 adults take at least one prescription medication, and nearly half take three or more. For these patients, abrupt decisions to stop or alter treatment, prompted by a commercial, not a doctor, can lead to health complications, hospitalizations, or worse.

Pennsylvania hospitals already face high rates of emergency visits tied to medication mismanagement. According to the Pennsylvania Health Care Cost Containment Council, medication-related issues are asignificant driver of preventable hospital admissions, costing our health system millions each year. If even a small portion of those cases are tied to fear stoked by legal ads, we have an urgent patient safety issue on our hands.

Older Pennsylvanians are especially vulnerable. They are more likely to take multiple prescriptions, morelikely to watch traditional television and more likely to be influenced by these ads. Rural communities, already struggling with limited access to care, are also at risk if patients make decisions based on commercials rather than on the advice of their doctors or pharmacists.

The problem is particularly acute in Pennsylvania. A report from the American Tort Reform Association shows that trial lawyers spend enormous sums of money in Pennsylvania to recruit new clients. From 2017 through 2021, 2.1 million legal ads aired on local television across the state, costing over $190 million. These numbers are staggering and underscore just how aggressively Pennsylvanians are being targeted with misleading advertising.

This is not to say patients shouldn’t have access to legal recourse when something goes wrong. But there is a difference between informing the public and misleading them. There are clear borders that should not be crossed.

For example, some lawsuit advertisements are presented in a way that looks and sounds like government-mandated health or public safety alerts. They create a sense of urgency, and viewers think the government has issued a recall or warning about a drug.

In other cases, the ads appear to show information about a drug being recalled when it is not the case. They can do this by using official-looking logos or using words such as “alert” and “urgent” in the ad.

Some states are taking it upon themselves to curb the most misleading practices in legal advertising. Their laws require ads to make it clear they are from an attorney and prohibit the use of terms such as “recall” if that is inaccurate. They also ban the use of government logos.

The Federal Trade Commission has sent letters to law firms when it believes there are potentially unlawful claims in drug lawsuit ads. Also, it’s worth noting that prescription drug advertising is tightly regulated by the Food and Drug Administration, unlike lawsuit ads aimed at pharmaceutical products. The FDA requires a “fair balance” of risks and benefits. If a drug ad makes unsupported claims, the agency can order corrections or removal and impose penalties. There is, however, no such FDA oversight for legal advertising about those drugs.

Pennsylvania policymakers should take a hard look at this issue. At a minimum, the state should require that legal advertisements about medications include a prominent disclaimer encouraging patients to consult their physician before stopping or changing treatment. That simple step, backed by the overwhelming 87% of Americans who support it, would help ensure medical decisions remain in the exam room, not on the TV screen.

At a time when trust in science and medicine is already fragile, we cannot afford to let misleading ads undermine public health. Patients deserve clear, accurate, and science-based information. Pennsylvanialawmakers have an opportunity to lead the way in protecting patient safety and putting patients first.

This is a contributed opinion column. Jennifer Riley is the statewide executive director of Patients Come First Pennsylvania. The views expressed in this piece are those of its individual author, and should not be interpreted as reflecting the views of this publication. Do you have a perspective to share? Learn more about how we handle guest opinion submissions at themorningcall.com/opinions.

https://www.mcall.com/2025/09/25/opinion-when-tv-lawsuit-ads-put-pa-patients-at-risk/