Posts Tagged medical malpractice

House Dems on Med Mal Reform: “Just Kidding!”

Remember President Obama’s talk about pilot programs to test medical malpractice reform as a way to control health care costs?  Well, it’s looking more and more like it was all done with a wink and a nod to the trial bar.

The Washington Times editorial “Chloroform for tort reform” exposes the truth:

With several restrictive qualifications and entirely at the discretion of the secretary of Health and Human Services, the provision, indeed, promises “an incentive payment” for states to try lawsuit reform. Then comes the kicker, though: The bill allows such incentive payments only if “the law does not limit attorneys’ fees or impose caps on damages.”

This provision is a poison pill. Fee limits or damage caps are the two most popular lawsuit reforms in states across the country, and they are demonstrably effective at cutting malpractice-insurance rates and attracting more doctors to the states that embrace them. To pretend to encourage tort reform while punishing states that actually implement reforms is akin to encouraging a diet while assessing fines for losing weight. It’s dishonest, and it ought to be a deal killer.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is behind the ploy that suggests a cynicism beyond the pale.  While it’s heartening that the Congressional majority believes that publicly opposing legal reform is hazardous to one’s political health it’s equally distressing that they may just get away with their disingenuous plan to kill it with a poison pill.

It’s time to step up, speak out and shine a spotlight on this sham.

, , , , ,

No Comments

An 83% solution - that’s dead on arrival

Serious students of health care reform recognize you’re hard pressed to achieve meaningful savings without reforming the malpractice system that forces doctors to practice defensive medicine.

And serious students of politics realize that asking the party of the trial bar to embrace meaningful legal reforms is as likely as the Washington Nationals mounting a late run for the pennant.

Philip K. Howard lays it all out in a piece titled “Why Medical Malpractice Is Off Limits” from the Wall Street Journal.

The upshot is simple:  A few thousand trial lawyers are blocking reforms that would benefit 300 million Americans.

The American public also favors legal overhaul.  A recent Common Good/Committee for Economic Development poll found that 83% of Americans believe that “as part of any health care reform plan, Congress needs to  change the medical malpractice system.”

But of course the trial bar has a stranglehold on scores of Capitol Hill Democrats who are protecting their deep-pocketed benefactors at nearly every turn.

Congress now realizes it can’t completely stonewall legal reform.  But what has unfolded so far is a series of vague pronouncements and token proposals - all of which assiduously avoid any specific ideas that might offend the trial bar.

The real tragedy is that trial lawyer greed both hurts legitimate victims and is trumping a solution that so many different experts agree is worth a try.

But under the current system, 54 cents of the malpractice dollar goes to lawyers and administrative costs, according to a 2006 study in the New England Journal of Medicine. And because the legal process is so expensive, most injured patients without large claims can’t even get a lawyer. “It would be hard to design a more inefficient compensation system,” says Michelle Mello, a professor of law and public health at Harvard, “or one which skewed incentives more away from candor and good practices.”

As for the trial bar’s cry that they’re the only guardian of victims of medical mistakes - well Howard puts that claim to the test.

Trial lawyers also suggest they alone are the bulwark against ineffective care, citing a 1999 study by the Institute of Medicine that “over 98,000 people are killed every year by preventable medical errors.” But the same study found that distrust of the justice system contributes to these errors by chilling interaction between doctors and patients. Trial lawyers haven’t reduced the errors. They’ve caused the fear.

Former Sen. John Edwards, for example, made a fortune bringing 16 cases against hospitals for babies born with cerebral palsy. Each of those tragic cases was worth millions in settlement. But according to a 2006 study at the National Institutes of Health, in nine out of 10 cases of cerebral palsy nothing done by a doctor could have caused the condition.

So as they used to say “follow the bouncing ball.”  It’s in the Democrats court now - unless of course the trial bar has already snatched it and hid it in their pocket.

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

No Comments

A Funny Bone: One Doc’s Prescription for the Legal Industry

With all the heat and light surrounding Obamacare, surprisingly little noise has come from the doctors on the front lines of providing health care. Until now.

In a Wall Street Journal piece titled “A Doctor’s Plan for Legal Industry Reform” Dr. Richard B. Rafal offers a hysterical, tongue-in-cheek look at how doctor’s might improve the legal profession.   The New York radiologist offers to turn the tables on the very lawyers that drive up health care costs with the filing of frivolous medical malpractice lawsuits.

Since lawyers are key architects of the proposed health care reform, Rafal reasons that doctors ought to be able to return the favor and oversee reform of the legal industry.

“I will gladly volunteer for the important duty of controlling and regulating lawyers. Since most of what lawyers do is repetitive boilerplate or pushing paper, physicians would have no problem dictating what is appropriate for attorneys. We physicians know much more about legal practice than lawyers do about medicine.”

“Physician committees can decide whether lawyers are necessary in any given situation.”

Dr. Rafal’s eleven proposals for reforming the legal system include: Legal DRGs, the rationing of legal care, physician controlled legal review and others. They’re sure to elicit laughter from most everyone but the trial bar.

Check out the full piece to see how applying the proposed “reforms” to health care would affect the legal profession.

, , , , ,

No Comments

Selling out doctors to pay off trial lawyers

Politico

By NEWT GINGRICH & WAYNE OLIVER | 9/3/09 2:26 PM EDT

politicologo

Civil justice reform, which is sometimes referred to as “tort reform,” is not addressed in any health reform bill now being considered by Congress. As a matter of fact, civil justice reform is rarely being discussed even though it should be a critical component of every discussion and in every legitimate health reform bill.

Physicians understand its importance. And so do the American people. Many are beginning to wonder why it’s not in any bill.

Howard Dean, former chairman of the Democratic National Committee, at a town hall meeting in Virginia last week said, “Tort reform is not in the bill because the people who wrote it did not want to take on the trial lawyers. And, that is the plain and simple truth.”

Read the rest of this entry »

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

No Comments

Tort Reform Is Key To Health Reform

By TIGER JOYCE | Posted Monday, August 24, 2009 4:20 PM PT

Investors Business Daily

ibdeditlogoThough common-sense Americans have repeatedly raised the issue of tort reform while discussing health care legislation with members of Congress during town hall meetings this month, too many lawmakers and analysts still stubbornly insist that medical liability lawsuits do not contribute significantly to rising health care costs. These lawmakers and analysts are wrong.

A 2006 Harvard School of Public Health study found that four out of every 10 medical malpractice lawsuits filed in America each year were “without merit.” Nonetheless, defending against such lawsuits imposes costs on doctors, hospitals and insurers that invariably are passed on to health care consumers.

Beyond the obvious costs of litigation, more subtle costs related to the practice of “defensive medicine” are contributing to runaway health care inflation.

How much? In a Massachusetts Medical Society survey published last November, 83% of Bay State physicians cited the fear of being sued in their decisions to practice defensive medicine. Read the rest of this entry »

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

No Comments

Dems’ Ace in the Hole on Health Care: Tort Reform

By Bob Beckel

rcpoliticslogo“It will be tough to make some of these changes if doctors feel like they’re looking over their shoulders for fear of lawsuits… some doctors may feel the need to order more tests and treatments to avoid being legally vulnerable.” (President Obama, American Medical Association June 2009).

“Anyone who denies there is a crisis in medical malpractice is probably a trial lawyer.”  (Barack Obama 1996 Illinois State Senate race).

“I’m not advocating caps on malpractice awards.” (President Obama, AMA convention June 2009).

The first two statements are right on Mr. President, reconsidering the third may well save healthcare reform.

Read the rest of this entry »

, , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

No Comments

data recovery software