Well, no plaintiff has "no fear" of having to pay for a defendant's expenses. Texas, and I am sure in all states, has laws requiring plaintiffs to pay for frivolous lawsuits. There is unfortunately no effective way to recover for a frivolous defense.
I oppose "loser pays" because it effectively closes the legal system to all but the very rich or the very poor (judgment proof). Gutting the civil justice system will just lead to more violence when people who have no legal recourse take matters into their own hands and just start killing negligent doctors. The conservative Republican judge in my last trial emphasized this point to the jury panel, that thanks to jurors and jury trials, we do not see people just getting a gun and settling matters themselves. That seems to be a value of having trials that you have overlooked or just discounted.
I suppose a defendant wrongfully sued, who's been ruined and made miserable...you don't worry about him getting a gun and going after the plaintiff's atty? You discount that rather easily. You'd be surprised to know that it might cross the minds of those assaulted and abused by legal profession.
I guess that's the thing about suing the gainfully employed and productive members of a society, they obey the law ...and, that's where the money is.
Most people who are injured are already going without justice and recompense, and without any shooting, because they've been hurt by criminals and near criminals, the broke and the government. Oh, and plaintiffs and their attornies.
The kind of "help" you imagine you are giving is left for those who can go after the private businesses and the well-insured, and you know that no matter how bad a job you do, you won't have to make the defendant "whole" again.