$250K is not enough.

You become a doctor, and pay their INSANE insurance prices, then you can come and discuss.

You have Sue happy america to blame.

 

[Gonad the Barbarian]

Originally posted by: LeeTJ

Originally posted by: calpha
I've got two sides of the story.........

I dont' think there should be a cap......but I dont' know a solution either. My father started a medical practice later in life as a career change......he wetn back to school to get his degree when he was in his forties. After his schooling he was a little over 6 figures in debt...and got that paid down some by working for others.

The main reason for the two-three year delay in him opening his own practice...wasn't just the cost of a lease somewhere, and necessary supplies--tables---etc----but the extremely large premium required for malpractice was another....wish I had a figure.

My wife's Gyno-Obstetrician-Pediatric is dropping the OCBGYN (wahter the hell the acro is) and just focusing on Pediatric b/c he can't afford all of the premiums.

lastly----a story about mal-practice.
My aunt who's in her late thirties had a cancerous tumor removed from her colon when she was 35. Prior to that---she'd been going to the same gastro specialist for three years b/c of severe digestive problems. He had diagnosed her with IBD (irritable bowel syndrome), and had ordered her to a special diet----and regular checkups.

For some reason...during that time---he never referred her to do a colonoscopy. ANd her symtpoms were severe. Loss of skin coloration, extreme loss of weight......frequent diahrea......as well as an inability (espeially in the last year and a half) to eat anything other then rice without a reaction.

After three years of going to the same MD and gastro specialist----she went to another center for a consult----and they ordered a colonoscopy. They got the results on a Friday----and she was in emergency surgery on sunday...just two days later. THe surgeon estimated that she was a matter of hours away from the colon rupturing from teh extreme size of the tumor---and upon removal--the surgeon estimated by the size of the tumor---it had been present for 4-6 years. During the surgery---they also removed 14 lymph nodes that were cancerous. A few months later....they also found a spot on her liver.

Oncology was recommending her to go to Radiation/Chemo---but openly told her to expect around 5 years at best if they can beat it into remission----she opted to go a different approach by a doctor in Atlanta---and was out of work for a year doing the treatment.....not to mention the $5k a month it cost out of pocket (no insurance covered that treatment).

Turns out----not less then a year later, there was an article I read in Good Housekeeping---which esposed the normal symptoms of colon cancer---to which she during the last two years befor surgery----had all of them----100%.

I don't know the status----I know these type things take a long time to work out----but she did turn all mediccal information over to the atttorney after the surgeon asked her what treatment had she been seeking (post op) and she told her she was going to a gastro-doc for the past three years. The surgeon was shocked----she'd thought she was avoiding medical care-----and was in disbelief that she was never in that time given a colonoscopy. They aslo could tell that the cancer had only begun spreading in the past year.

Now---if it turns out that the doctor was at fault----and should have under proper diagnosis----caught the cancer by way of standard diagnosis detrminations much earlier---I don't think that she should only be given a max of 250K. That's not a limb...a leg----or eyesight.

That's her life.

all my ob-gyn clients are talking about giving up at least obstetrics.

oh btw, the doctors aren't for this. to them this is just a political move with no real reprucussions. as i said in post just before the largest judgements are for PUNITIVE damages anyway. Punitive won't change will still be outrageous, hence malpractice premiums really won't go down that much.

Actually, punitive damages are limited in this bill as well, with a max of $500K. I'd rather see them get banned all together though. The victim should be entitled to what properly compensates them - no more, no less. Punitive damges are purely punishment against the offending party, the victim is not entitled to it. And issues of punishment should really be left up to the criminal courts.

 

[NorthRiver]

But if you really think about it, you can sue for the lost wages from your job, and get pain and suffering. The lost wages would add up big time if you were unable to do that job ever again. Couple that with the pain, and suffering of 250k, and you are still looking at 1 million, at least.

 

[dahunan]

Malpractice against my family and it will be Vigilante Justice - TRUST THAT...

 

[SagaLore]

Maybe we should just get rid of it altogether. And repremend/discharge the doctors themselves and invest more into education and regulation.

 

[dahunan]

Originally posted by: Gonad the Barbarian

Originally posted by: LeeTJ

Originally posted by: calpha
I've got two sides of the story.........

I dont' think there should be a cap......but I dont' know a solution either. My father started a medical practice later in life as a career change......he wetn back to school to get his degree when he was in his forties. After his schooling he was a little over 6 figures in debt...and got that paid down some by working for others.

The main reason for the two-three year delay in him opening his own practice...wasn't just the cost of a lease somewhere, and necessary supplies--tables---etc----but the extremely large premium required for malpractice was another....wish I had a figure.

My wife's Gyno-Obstetrician-Pediatric is dropping the OCBGYN (wahter the hell the acro is) and just focusing on Pediatric b/c he can't afford all of the premiums.

lastly----a story about mal-practice.
My aunt who's in her late thirties had a cancerous tumor removed from her colon when she was 35. Prior to that---she'd been going to the same gastro specialist for three years b/c of severe digestive problems. He had diagnosed her with IBD (irritable bowel syndrome), and had ordered her to a special diet----and regular checkups.

For some reason...during that time---he never referred her to do a colonoscopy. ANd her symtpoms were severe. Loss of skin coloration, extreme loss of weight......frequent diahrea......as well as an inability (espeially in the last year and a half) to eat anything other then rice without a reaction.

After three years of going to the same MD and gastro specialist----she went to another center for a consult----and they ordered a colonoscopy. They got the results on a Friday----and she was in emergency surgery on sunday...just two days later. THe surgeon estimated that she was a matter of hours away from the colon rupturing from teh extreme size of the tumor---and upon removal--the surgeon estimated by the size of the tumor---it had been present for 4-6 years. During the surgery---they also removed 14 lymph nodes that were cancerous. A few months later....they also found a spot on her liver.

Oncology was recommending her to go to Radiation/Chemo---but openly told her to expect around 5 years at best if they can beat it into remission----she opted to go a different approach by a doctor in Atlanta---and was out of work for a year doing the treatment.....not to mention the $5k a month it cost out of pocket (no insurance covered that treatment).

Turns out----not less then a year later, there was an article I read in Good Housekeeping---which esposed the normal symptoms of colon cancer---to which she during the last two years befor surgery----had all of them----100%.

I don't know the status----I know these type things take a long time to work out----but she did turn all mediccal information over to the atttorney after the surgeon asked her what treatment had she been seeking (post op) and she told her she was going to a gastro-doc for the past three years. The surgeon was shocked----she'd thought she was avoiding medical care-----and was in disbelief that she was never in that time given a colonoscopy. They aslo could tell that the cancer had only begun spreading in the past year.

Now---if it turns out that the doctor was at fault----and should have under proper diagnosis----caught the cancer by way of standard diagnosis detrminations much earlier---I don't think that she should only be given a max of 250K. That's not a limb...a leg----or eyesight.

That's her life.

all my ob-gyn clients are talking about giving up at least obstetrics.

oh btw, the doctors aren't for this. to them this is just a political move with no real reprucussions. as i said in post just before the largest judgements are for PUNITIVE damages anyway. Punitive won't change will still be outrageous, hence malpractice premiums really won't go down that much.

Actually, punitive damages are limited in this bill as well, with a max of $500K. I'd rather see them get banned all together though. The victim should be entitled to what properly compensates them - no more, no less. Punitive damges are purely punishment against the offending party, the victim is not entitled to it. And issues of punishment should really be left up to the criminal courts.

How can you decide what someones future was GOING to be like BEFORE they were paralyzed or lost use of an eye, or accidentally had their ability to reproduce taken away ETC ETC????

 

[rahvin]

Originally posted by: Gonad the Barbarian

Originally posted by: rahvin

Originally posted by: Gonad the Barbarian
All you saying pain and suffering claims are bullsh1t, say you had a job that paid well and you loved doing it, but due to a medical mistake can no longer work that job or any other, or do the hobbies you enjoyed doing, or maybe even day-today stuff you take for granted like dressing or feeding yourself, all the while suffering chronic pain, you would be perfectly content if you were just awarded the lost wages from your job and your medical bills?

If you aren't willing to accept the risks of a surgery do not have the surgury. Doctors are humans, they make mistakes but you went to them for help. To accept medical help you must be willing to take the risks of that medical help or you SHOULD NOT SEEK IT. Life isn't fair, and you shouldn't expect perfection EVER. Life is full of risks and you must assume the consequences of those risks when you make any decision including the choice to live.

WTF kind of thinking is that? Doctor's have a responsibility to do their job just like everyone else. If they screw up, they should be held responsible. If you go to McDonald's and they get your order wrong, are they not responsible because you decided to go there? Your reasoning is the most assinine thing I've ever seen.

The only thing assinine above is trying to compare getting an order wrong at mcdonalds to having a medical treatment. Providing the risks of a surgery or procedure are explained to a patient there should be no damages outside provable actual damages. Punative damages should only be engaged where it can be proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that the doctor acted to treat something outside his area of expertise or was deliberately negligent. In both cases it should be a requirement for the punative damages to apply that the doctor be censored by the state monitoring agency.

You like many other ignorant americans have a mistaken belief that doctors actually know what they are doing. This is true when dealing with a commonly seen malady but when dealing with something that is uncommon or unknown 99% of the time the doctor knows as little as you do. You seek their help because they have training that makes it easier for them to find out what the unknown problem is than it would be for you yourself to do it. In this regard you cannot EVER expect perfection. No two humans are identical. Nerves, blood vessels even shape and size of major organs varies as much as appearance. Because of this and the fact that many maladays have the same symptoms diagnosis of anything can be exceedingly difficult and doctors will make mistakes. This should be a lesson they teach people in HS because the average american is profoundly ignorant of what modern medicine entails and the risks associated with it.

 

[Vic]

By a 229-196 vote, the House passed a bill Thursday that would cap noneconomic damages, such as compensation for loss of a limb or sight, at $250,000. The bill would not limit compensation for medical bills, funeral expenses and other economic damages.

The limit is on non-economic, or punitive, damages only. All other real economic damages would be covered, and as such would include loss of income, benefits, etc.
As "pain and suffering" jury awards have been reaching ridiculous all-time highs, often far in excess of the plaintiff's potential lifetime income, I see nothing wrong with this. Many times those outrageous jury awards were just so the greedy lawyers could get their ~33%, and the cost was being passed down to doctors from their insurance companies, putting many doctors out of business, and to us in the form of higher and higher medical costs.
I applaud the House for having the balls to stand up to the Trial Lawyers Association today and to do what was (unfortunately) the only thing that could be done to fix this increasingly worsening problem.

 

[Gonad the Barbarian]

Originally posted by: Vic

By a 229-196 vote, the House passed a bill Thursday that would cap noneconomic damages, such as compensation for loss of a limb or sight, at $250,000. The bill would not limit compensation for medical bills, funeral expenses and other economic damages.

The limit is on non-economic, or punitive, damages only. All other real economic damages would be covered, and as such would include loss of income, benefits, etc.
As "pain and suffering" jury awards have been reaching ridiculous all-time highs, often far in excess of the plaintiff's potential lifetime income, I see nothing wrong with this. Many times those outrageous jury awards were just so the greedy lawyers could get their ~33%, and the cost was being passed down to doctors from their insurance companies, putting many doctors out of business, and to us in the form of higher and higher medical costs.
I applaud the House for having the balls to stand up to the Trial Lawyers Association today and to do what was (unfortunately) the only thing that could be done to fix this increasingly worsening problem.

You have to be kidding me. They aren't standing up against the Trial Lawyers Association, the are laying down for the insurance industry. I cited three potential ways to fix this problem in my original post, limiting pain & suffering is far from the only solution is definitely the least fair for the victims.

rahvin, I personally don't have any more faith in doctor's than I do the kids working at McDonald's. But the fact is, doctors SHOULD know what they are doing, or they should not be doing it, plain and simple. There is a difference between medical risks and medical mistakes.

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: Gonad the Barbarian
House passes medical malpractice bill

This pain and suffering limit is absurdley low. If their has to be a limit, it should at least be reasonable, and take into account the worst case scenerio for a potential victim. $250K is just not that much money, especially considering just how much suffering it is expected to compensate. If you NEEDLESSLY lost a limb, your sight, your ability to walk, your cognitive ability, a loved one, would you be satisfied with $250K? I agree something needs to be done about this problem, but there are much better solutions. How about the AMA suspending the bad-apple doctors out there that habitually make mistakes and get sued? Or insurance companies actually charging each doctor based on their individual risk and record? Or maybe even banning the award of punitive damages in malpractice cases? We are trading one problem for two with this bill. We'll probably lower the cost of malpractice insurance, but we'll be cheating those who have valid malpractice cases out of proper compensation and allowing the medical and insurance industries to continue their behavior that helped get us all into this situation in the first place.

bad apple doctors that habitually make mistakes? i think you'll find few of those, since after a few mistakes their malpractice premiums would put them out of business

insurance companies do charge based on risks and record. the premiums for doctors with no bad record are high because the risk of getting sued for lots is high.

if you read the article you linked to you'll see that punitive damages were limited by this bill as well.

3 strikes, you're out.

 

[LeeTJ]

Actually, punitive damages are limited in this bill as well, with a max of $500K. I'd rather see them get banned all together though. The victim should be entitled to what properly compensates them - no more, no less. Punitive damges are purely punishment against the offending party, the victim is not entitled to it. And issues of punishment should really be left up to the criminal courts.

IF so, then EXCELLENT. One of my clients had told me that the bill didn't include Punitive damages and i was just going by what he said.

believe it or not people this is a GOOD thing for most people. the doctors most affected by Malpractice insurance were the OB-Gyns. if not for a bill like this they would all be quitting their practices. a world with ZERO obstetricians is NOT a good thing.

 

[BaliBabyDoc]

Fact is, the way the legal system is set up, we'll still have critical shortages of trauma surgeons & Obstertics Dr's.

The critical shortage of trauma surgeons and OBs is the result of multiple factors. Trauma competes with the other surgical subspecialties for surgeons but it is on the low end of compensation. OBs get a standard fee for ALL of the care a woman requires from conception through delivery. I think it's $1500 . . . which doesn't buy a lot of ultrasounds. There's great satisfaction but little money in delivering babies. There's a whole lot of money in taking care of the extra female plumbing from puberty until death. Another issue is that relatively few residents want to spend their professional careers in the desert of NM or the inner city of Detroit. Hence, the shortage of trauma surgeons, OBs, and other physicians varies dramatically by location.

rahvin, I personally don't have any more faith in doctor's than I do the kids working at McDonald's. But the fact is, doctors SHOULD know what they are doing, or they should not be doing it, plain and simple. There is a difference between medical risks and medical mistakes.

Rarely, if ever mentioned in this discussion, the duplicity of doctors is a major reason for malpractice in America. A minority of physicians are responsible for a majority of all malpractice claims. While it is true that neurosurgery, OB, and orthopedic surgery face more claims due to the high risk nature of the disciplines . . . they also have their share of inadequate physicians. The lack of appropriate surveillance and intervention to defend patients from bad doctors is a travesty. Some states have addressed this issue but in general the best advocate for patients has been the blood-sucking trial lawyers.

 

[BaliBabyDoc]

believe it or not people this is a GOOD thing for most people. the doctors most affected by Malpractice insurance were the OB-Gyns. if not for a bill like this they would all be quitting their practices. a world with ZERO obstetricians is NOT a good thing.

It is not good for most people b/c there will NOT be a dramatic decline in premiums if this legislation is enacted. Plenty of states passed tort reform for medmal but many of those same states are in crisis. CA is lauded as the exemplary case of how limiting medmal controls premiums. The truth is that CA also has a state agency that regulates premiums. It is the combination of limiting damages and controlling what insurance companies charge that make a state hospitable to physicians.

As one OB put it . . . "it's no wonder they don't reimburse us more for doing something that used be performed by a woman going out in the woods and squatting . . ."

If a woman has good prenatal care and the pregnancy is uncomplicated . . . OBs are essentially unnecessary. A doula and a midwife are old school but equal to OBs under this scenario which is relatively common. Everything else requires an OB. OBs manage delivery and intervene if necessary. Their skills are absolutely vital to moderate and high risk pregancies.

 

[Dufusyte]

Keep inflation in mind whenever there is a dollar figure mentioned in legislation. When the income tax was initiated it was only targeted at "rich" people earning over $10,000, which was alot at the time.

In ten years, $250,000 will be worth less than a year's salary.

 

[BaliBabyDoc]

n ten years, $250,000 will be worth less than a year's salary.

Not to be an arse . . . it will be less than mine but many people will see stagnant wages for several years . . . in particular people who work for local/state agencies like teachers, PD, FD, etc.

 

[Gonad the Barbarian]

Originally posted by: ElFenix

bad apple doctors that habitually make mistakes? i think you'll find few of those, since after a few mistakes their malpractice premiums would put them out of business

Exactly, there are few of these doctors, and they are driving the insurance premiums up for ALL OF THEM. Why? well...

insurance companies do charge based on risks and record. the premiums for doctors with no bad record are high because the risk of getting sued for lots is high.

Malpractice insurance premiums are based on the field you are in, and NOT your personal record. A doctor who has had no suits filed against him is paying just as much as a doctor who has had a dozen or more.

if you read the article you linked to you'll see that punitive damages were limited by this bill as well.

If you had read my other posts in this thread you would see I was the first one to point that out.

3 strikes, you're out.

Next time you want to strike me out kid you ought to try not throwing slow and right down the middle so I don't end up smacking you out of the park.

 

[LethalWolfe]

Originally posted by: SammySon
You have Sue happy america to blame.

Lethal

 

[amnesiac]

I have 750+ doctors as clients, and ALL of them get pwned by high malpractice insurance premiums.

Why?

Because you have greedy @ssfvcks out there who like nothing more than suing anyone with money, and in many cases, doctors have money and are less capable of defending themselves like lawyers.

RARELY are malpractice cases a result of the doctor causing real, tangible harm/injury. Most cases are because the patient disagreed with the doctor over something or some other b.s. reason.

I'm not saying that doctors are never wrong, it's just that the patient is rarely right to sue.
Even if a patient sues and LOSES, the doctor still gets railed by legal fees and higher premiums, and it drives up the overall cost of malpractice insurance for everyone else.

 

[Gonad the Barbarian]

Even if a patient sues and LOSES, the doctor still gets railed by legal fees and higher premiums, and it drives up the overall cost of malpractice insurance for everyone else.

This is true, and is a pretty good indication that the insurance companies themselves are a big part of the problem. Of course they are going completely unaddressed in this bill.

 

[AnyMal]

Originally posted by: EngenZerO
heh, I thought you were talking about Howard Stern Show and the new ppv they are trying to get organized (involving an act that most men would shutter to think).

engen

lol ditto!

 

[heartsurgeon]

what you idiots don't understand is that this does nothing to reduce the amount of money that can be awarded for loss of wages, medical expenses, etc. this is not a limit on the total award, but only on the undefinable "pain and suffering"..

now what is medical malpractice really about..
well i think i can give you an educated idea, because i've been paying close to $50,000/year for the pleasure of having malpractice insurance.

#1) the single greatest problem with medical malpractice suits is that they have NOTHING TO DO WITH BAD MEDICINE, onl;y bad outcome.

This results in the lunacy that neurosurgeons, heart surgeons, obstetricians pay ten time more for malpractice insurance than your family doctor or internist. Is this because they are tens time worst doctors? No, it's because these doctors deal with really sick people, and sometimes really sick people die no matter what you do. But if you die or have a bad outcome the lawyers will have you believe that "sombody screwed up"
So who does really high malpractice premiums hurt the most..the doctors that take care of the sickest patients, and the patients who are the sickest!

#2) There is ABSOLUTELY NO DOWNSIDE TO FILING A MALPRACTICE SUIT AGAINST A DOCTOR. You call a lawyer, he fills out a form letter and for the price of postage, he sends in a malpractice claim. what happens to the doctor? In several states (Mississippi, Pennsylvania, etc) you will LOSE YOU ABILITY TO WORK because you will not be able to get insurance, and the lawyers have rigged it so you can't get a medical licence in those states without insurance. More harm is being done by the filing of suits, than the actual jury awards i my opinion. Over 80% of medical malpractice cases get DISMISSED and never even go to trial (to get a case dismissed means there is NO WAY ANY JURY COULD FIND FAULT) 80%!!! Everyone of those cases costs the insured money.

#3) Society sets the "cost" and "payments" for the delivery of health care. 75% of my practice is paid for by medicare..that means i only get paid what the government (representing the public) are willing to pay. what i get paid today is half of what i got paid for the same work 20 years ago. everyone else in my office gets paid more, my malpractice costs five times as much. If society can set a price on the value of MY SERVICES, why can't society set a price on pain and suffereing, and anything else for that matter which meets the public good?
you can't pay me less and less, and charge me more and more to to what i do, and expect me to be able to stay in practice much longer. what will you do when i am gone and there is nobody to replace me..don't think it could'nt happen because it's happening right now in pennsylvania.

#4) There is not this vast reservoir of "evil bad doctors" causing patients to suffer and die, there is a vast reservoir of evil and bad lawyers suing everyone in site Coffee at MacDonalds to HOT, eat to much fast food and got fat, there is a lawyer that will sue someone for you.

I was sued by a patient who went through 30 different lawyers until he found one greedy enough to try to blame me for some ridiculous crap. This lawyer named his own BROTHER-IN-LAW doctor as his "expert witness" against me. When we deposed the brother-in-law about the care i gave THE BROTHER-IN-LAW DOCTOR said I did everything right! The dumbass lawyer couldn't even get his own brother-in-law to support his argument. Case thrown out by a judge..but it still made my malpractice premiums skyrocket. this is the bullsh!t that i have to put up with.

how would you feel if EVERYTIME you did something at work, it could potentially end your career, result in your financial ruinination, and your "customer" was a potential lawsuit against you, inspite of getting the best grades, going to the best schools, training 15 years AFTER COLLEGE, and passing countless certification exams, and having your work scrutinized under a microscope constantly by your place of work, the state goverment, and the federal goverment. And to top it off, your making less and less the further along you are in your career.

the biggest problem with medical malpractice is that the lawyers have everyone believing that they are doing what is best for you.....
the lawyers are doing what is best for them!! wake up!!

they want it really easy to sue anyone for anything.
they want absolutely no downside to filing frivolous cases

the single thing that would make it all right would be to use the British Rule.. anyone can bring a lawsuit against anyone for anything...
BUT THE LOSER PAYS FOR ALL COSTS!!

i'm happy to let anyone sue me, and take my house away if they can prove i didn't do my job right,
but why should i have to pay a single penny IF THEY ARE JUST PLAIN WRONG!

there you have it..no limit pain and suffering, no limit on other issues, no limit on your legal costs getting reimbursed..but you better be darn sure of your facts before you accuse me of medical malpractice..

but facts be d@mned!! you think any trial lawyer will go along with that! i don't think so.