Sounds like you are a proponent of No-Fault coverage Flip.
Please define "Life Altering" as it pertains to an auto accident.
That is the burden you supposedly need to overcome to sue in this state - otherwise the money in that fund is supposed to overcome all the ills.
I will tell you how the courts define it isn't how I would.
I'm for no fault but with a cap. The unlimited coverage is unnecessary and financially burdensome.
Life altering is about how much you can pocket from an 'accident'.... Note, no 'accident' is really accidental, they are all caused by contributing factors and liability. We use the term 'accident' to mask the root cause and relieve our guilt. I like 'crash' better. Much more final and removes or alleviates no guilt.
I know to gal's who are veggies for ever due to 'crashes' that were their own fault but still collect on the MCCA for nursing home care and treatment (after their own insurance policies reached the maximum payout). Do I think it's right? No, but it will be until the mindset changes regarding the prolonging of life at all costs.
Other states do just fine without, what makes Michigan different?