Witnesses Tell of Poor Care by Armed Forces Doctors : Military: House panel is considering changes in a doctrine that bars service personnel from bringing medical malpractice suits against the government.

Willie Harris, once a strong, able-bodied serviceman with plans to play professional basketball, testified Wednesday that Air Force doctors wrecked his knees--along with his career plans--by administering repeated injections of cortisone.

Harris, who lives in Huntington Beach, told members of Congress that his treatment at the hands of military physicians transformed him from a promising athlete into an angry disabled veteran whose legs will hardly support him and whose condition is expected to worsen.

Harris was one of eight witnesses who appeared before a House subcommittee that is weighing possible legislative action to modify the Feres doctrine, which bars members of the armed forces from bringing medical malpractice suits against the U.S. government.

Harris said that his disability resulted from medical treatment by U.S. Air Force doctors in the mid-1960s. He was given repeated cortisone injections after he fell and injured both knees during an Air Force basketball game. Harris said that the steroid was injected into his knee joints to relieve the pain so he could continue playing for the Air Force team for almost two years. He was never warned of the potential risks associated with the cortisone treatments, which include deterioration of cartilage in the joints, he said.

His attempts to sue the military for malpractice have been thwarted by the Feres doctrine’s prohibition against members of the armed services, their survivors and dependents suing the federal government for incidents related to military service.

Harris said that his right kneecap has eroded almost completely and that he has undergone 15 operations. He may require plastic kneecap inserts and eventually could be confined to a wheelchair. Although Harris receives $1,620 a month in compensation from the government, he said that hardly compares with what he might have made as a professional basketball player.

The legislation under consideration by the House Judiciary subcommittee on administrative law would allow malpractice suits against military doctors, but only for cases that arise in the future.

“I know that this bill will not help me, but anything I can do for military malpractice vets, I’m willing to fight for,” Harris said. “The military destroyed my knees, but it did not destroy my mind.”

Also testifying before the committee was Paulette Wall, whose husband, Maj. Michael Wall, died of complications from a heart attack. She said that her husband was told to return to physical training even though he had reported chest pains to Army doctors and two medical tests had shown abnormal results.

“My frustration lies in the fact that my husband did not have to die,” Wall said. “Had he received negligent treatment in a private hospital, I would have legal recourse to seek damages. But because my husband was patriotic . . , I am left with nothing.”

But officials from the Justice and Defense departments told the committee that the proposed legislation would “undermine a sound, long-standing and viable rule of law” and said that they “strongly oppose” the measure.

Stuart Gerson, assistant attorney general for the Justice Department, said that the military has a uniform, comprehensive, no-fault compensation system.

The armed forces compensate not only victims of medical malpractice, but all military personnel who suffer service-related injuries and members of their families. Recipients are entitled to financial compensation as well as lifetime medical care, Gerson said, and the quality of care provided by the services has improved significantly in recent years.