It does get a bit tiresome seeing lawyers blamed for any apparent incident of 'the law gone mad'. Isn't blaming lawyers also party of the blame culture?
To be clear, I accept there are lawyers of the ambulance chasing mentality. However, if we end up with decisions which appear to preclude 'accidents', those decisions are more likely isolated judgments of junior judges rather than established decisions adopted by the higher courts. Actually, I think a lot of the stuff is myth. The insurance companies also have a role to play (as regards their stance when it comes to settling litigation which never deserved to succeed purely on the basis of an economic evaluation of each claim in isolation). But, by far the biggest cause of all is aggrieved parties who want to find someone to blame and use the courts to do it and thus need to hire lawyers. Should the lawyers turn them away? Now, if a relative of a poor soul killed by an aircraft 'accident' wants to vent their feelings through litigation, I'd see it as one outcome of a natural outpouring of grief, maybe anger or bitterness - but no less natural.
At the end of the day, it does us no harm to critically self-examine the morals of such situations and there's room for more than view. If the law becomes a lens through which such analysis sometimes takes place, and even if it's a process undertaken by ambulance-chasers, I'm glad I live in a place where the process is mostly satisfactory and objective.