I have wondered for some time when the issue of malpractice insurance and the effect of our country’s infatuation with lawsuits on the medical professions would get some serious attention. It seems so obvious to me - and no doubt countless others - but unless we take up this banner and run with it, and force those making policy to deal with it, the trial lawyers (like the union bosses, and other “favored friends” of those in power) will continue getting fatter and richer, and our system of health care will collapse as more and more members of the medical community go “John Galt” and either quit practicing medicine or practice their profession in places other than the USA. What a sad and sorry commentary! Thank you for a well written expose of this important issue.

Join the RedState Strike Force

Don’t like comparisons to Canada or the UK? Fine. They say instead to compare to France and Holland. But let’s see comparisons in France of what trial lawyers do to THEIR medical system. We sure as heck won’t see that info from any Democrat!

And I bet the effect of illegal immigrants is far worse here than in any of those other countries.

reid, and de list goes on in congress it would be a glorius day in the United States of America. Its time for term limits to stop these foney fraudulent good ol boy clubs in Washington DC

well, the posibilities are endless, arn’t they!

Sure, it make for more tests and alike being done in order to lessen the chance of being sued., but it make for more redundancy that isn’t necessary. One angle of this is being overlooked, is over regulation of the hospitals and hospital labs as well. There are six regulatory bodies that certify hospital labs and a few that certify hospitals as well. I can’t think of all of them without either emailing my dad or calling on it.

All the commentary connected with this post are true, but I have yet to hear on the news or during interviews ANY republication legislator raise this issue when discussing health care reform.

Just as the democrats quietly avoid any discussion of malpractice reform to protect their trial lawyer supporters, the republicans avoid any challenge to the democrats on the issue. Every time a bleeding heart liberal raises the issue of high cost insurance premiums on the patient, the republicans should be ready to respond with the high cost of maipractice insurance on the medical providers caused by the ambulance chasers who will seek any opportunity to file a lawsuit.

Again, I ask why are the republican legislators and voices so silent on this issue?

Malpractice insurance rates are definitely sky high, my wife is in medicine so I know first hand. But the studies above don’t address the most important question of all - WHY are they so high? They throw out some facts about insurance costs and malpractice lawsuits, but don’t make a direct connection between the two. For example, how much do medical insurers pay out each year on malpractice lawsuits vs. the premiums they collect from insured doctors? The truth is, this whole problem is far more about profit than it is lawsuits.

When you get an inside look, from a doctor’s perspective, it’s clear that the insurance companies are completely taking advantage of their captive market. Doctors simply must have malpractice insurance to practice, so the insurance companies are essentially gatekeepers to that doctor’s ability to work, period. As a result, they drive rates through the roof, and no matter how high they go every doctor in the US must pay or find a new career. How does a system like that make any kind of sense? Believe me, most doctors hate insurance companies and know they are getting ripped.

THIS is why some people are against relying on private insurers for our health care system - their natural inclination toward profits is forcing each and every one of us to pay far more for services than is necessary. When you’re talking about TVs and luxury services the “free market” system is all well and good, but essential services shouldn’t be held hostage for profits IMO.

Would be a good idea.

I’ve not seen anyone propose another idea that would be effective. “Punitive damages” are a court-imposed punishment for misbehavior. By what logic are the plaintiffs (and their lawyers) entitled to what amounts to a fine imposed by government. Why not have punitive damages go to the government and be regulated to some multiple of monetary compensation. Trial lawyers would be fishing for a much smaller catch and settlements would be more attractive.

Tort law should make victims whole, not necessarily make them rich.

Take this for what it’s worth. I’m an insurance defense lawyer, have several doctor friends, and have never represented a plaintiff in a PI case of any sort.

Texas went through tort reform several years ago now, capping certain damages in med mal cases. It was passed under the auspices of lowering med mal insurance rates. My understanding is that med mal filings have dropped significantly. However, my doctor friends have not seen a drop in their insurance rates. This is unsurprising since (1) insurance companies are for-profit corporations, and (2) the doctors have already shown a willingness to pay the old rates of insurance, so why lower the rates? I’m not against insurance companies making money, by the way. Charge what the market will bear.

So now we are in a situation where verdicts are lower, fewer suits are filed, but the whole reason behind passing the legislation has not occurred.

Now, I’d also like to raise the point that we, as conservatives, are against government bureaucrats from telling us how much we should be charged for medical care or what medical care we can or cannot receive. What, then, is the argument for having politicians set caps on med mal verdicts? Which politicians are to do this? Should it be delegated to a “blue ribbon committee”? Should it simply be a reasonableness standard, and left up to courts to reduce outrageous verdicts? (And believe me, outrageous verdicts do occur.)

The loser pay idea is good in theory, but bad in practice. How could a poor working stiff who believes he was wrongfully injured by a doctor ever afford to pay the doctor if he couldn’t prove that the doctor caused his injuries? The doctor, of course, has insurance, but the Plaintiff generally has no substantial assets.

One additional issue in Texas, which I’m not sure how I feel about, is this: In order to run a med mal suit in Texas, you have to get a doctor, within a certain number of days of filing suit, to prepare a report detailing how the defendant committed malpractice. I think this is generally a good thing. But in small towns like mine it would be virtually impossible to find a doctor who will testify against another doctor. Plus, it must be quite expensive to find such an expert. And when damages are capped, it means that less-damaging malpractice by doctors are never pursued because Plaintiffs’ lawyers cannot risk spending 100K on expenses to run a lawsuit with small, or capped damages. While under the old system too many people were sued, under the current system it is probably the case that more doctors can commit malpractice unpunished than would otherwise be the case. (No stats on that, it’s pure deductive reasoning… or impure deductive reasoning if you disagree.)

Lastly, the runaway verdict issue is often a canard. If a doctor has a one million dollar policy, then the carrier will only be liable for that amount. So insurance companies always have a capped amount they can lose, which is the only way insurance companies can exist.

I’ve written way too much, and haven’t posted here in forever. Be kind in your disapproval of this post.

Some how lawyers have managed to monopolize the flow of information to prevent themselves from being accountable. Lawyers are allowed to pursue unreasonable allegations for money. It has poisoned the system which looks for the scapegoat, INSURANCE COMPANIES. It’s the huge elephant in the room that’s ignored.

He told them he wanted medical malpractice “reform”, but failed to go into detail about what it may entail. He did, however, tell physicians that he didn’t think it was “fair” to cap medical malpractice awards. They do have a cap in Florida and most physicians there go “naked” which means that typically it’s cheaper for a doctor to pay damages to a patient in court than it is to afford medical malpractice insurance.
Some Dems in the House have suggested mild reform in malpractice lawsuits, but most aren’t supporting it because they don’t believe it would do any good in deterring lawsuits. Nice, huh?
I’m sure what they mean is…….this isn’t going to help high paid lawyers who contribute to my campaign every year.
Can anyone remember any daytime tv they’ve watched where they haven’t seen some ad by a law firm telling you if you have taken a particular drug and experienced certain side effects, you “may be entitled to damages”. There are hundreds of those stupid ads. It’s obviously working well for them here in the U.S.
I agree this should be a major part of their “reform”.

As a doctor (I just graduated and am doing my internship) I can tell you that defensive medicine is an important cause of rising medical costs and we should attempt to lower the need to practice in order to avoid lawsuits, but it won’t lower costs by as much as we need. That will take market reforms that force patients to face the costs of diagnosis and treatment.

Most of the extra and unnecessary medical care is ordered because doctors feel a duty to advocate for their patients and give them the highest level of care available (i.e. covered by their insurance). A $5/month drug might be 95% as effective as a $200/month drug or maybe they are equally effective but the $5 drug is more likely to give you a mild side effect. Either way the vast majority of doctors will prescribe the better drug as long as the insurance will pay for it. The same goes for testing and other treatments.

Without motivation from patients, doctors aren’t going to be the ones to say can we innovate and be even more effective for less money. Government would do the opposite and be less effective for more money. The only way to fix the system is to make patients face more of the costs so through market competition they demand better services for less money.

I am a doctor just beginning my career so I will obviously benefit from any type of tort reform. Even though it is in my own self-interest to see this addressed nationally, it is a state issue. You can’t shop medical malpractice claims in multiple states and jurisdictions the way you can with other lawsuits.

I hate to see conservatives run to Washington in order to have the federal government intervene all because conservatives were too inept to accomplish the reforms on the state level where they need to be taken care of.

I know there are plenty of states where tort-reform could never happen in the near-term. Let the market work its magic and before long doctors will move to other states and the shortages of doctors will force reform.