PIAA, NPDB Data Show Med-Mal Costs Still Rising

May 5, 2004

  • May 5, 2004 at 1:09 am
    Keith Maurer says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    An alternative to expensive,risky lawsuits already exists – – arbitration. More and more health care providers, insurers, and patients are turning to arbitration to combat the high costs and delays of lawsuits. By including an agreement to route future disputes into arbitration rather than litigation, parties are entitled to all substantive remedies available in court, but at a fraction of the cost.

    The National Arbitration Forum (NAF) is the premier resource for arbitration services and educational material. Please let me know if I can assist with an article or program.

    Regards,

    Keith Maurer, Esq
    Assistant General Counsel and Director of Health Care ADR Programs
    National Arbitration Forum

  • May 5, 2004 at 4:17 am
    Pat Brogan says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    The MedMal crises can be fixed in five words:

    1-Loser Pays
    2-Police your own

    1-Self explanatory.
    2-Clemson University published a study on SC medmal losses. 61% of losses were caused by 3.9% of the Doctors. The doctors refuse to censure their own inept colleagues.

    Simple, no?

  • May 5, 2004 at 5:18 am
    SF says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    From the tone of Mr. Brogan’s note, I believe I am on the other side of the issue. However, I do agree with the “police your own” suggestion and would include within that some penalty for “experts” (on either side) who provide affidavits regarding standard of care without a solid basis for their opinions. Peer review should be available with risk of sanction.

  • May 6, 2004 at 4:53 am
    john krall says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    loser pays is just a way to close the courthouse doors to ordinary americans. the only way to reduce malpractie claims is to have the medical profession police bad dr’s who make up the vast majority of paid claims. how much have medical costs risen in the same period of the time this study looked at-obviously,those injured by negligent dr’s require medical treatment which cost continue to increase. possibly the answer to controling premiums is to contain health care costs.

  • May 7, 2004 at 5:07 am
    Roger Griffin says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    if not more expensive than litigation. In arbitration, the Plaintiff and Defendant will both do the same amount of discovery done in formal litigation. In addition, both sides will still need the same experts. And, of course, the same disputes will still arise that will have to be decided by a costly arbitrator or arbitration pannel (judges are free). What you are not told is that under arbitration you end up paying for 1-3 arbitrators at an hourly rate (each) of between $250-500 an hour. Clearly arbitration does not save time or money. FWIW, I am not advocating a bar to aribtration. It does have its place. However, it should be a voluntary process that both sides mutually agree to the time, place, manner, etc.
    As to the medical tort crisis (which is what this issue is based on) ask yourself what facts have ever been presented to show that med-mal cases are the reason behind rising premiums. Don’t accept blanket statements about rising costs, doctors leaving the profession, etc. Demand to see factual sources/studies that you can use to help verify the veracity or lack thereof of these claims. For instance, go to http://www.utcourts.gov (the official State of Utah Court website) and look at their annual report on the judiciary. There you will see that in 2003 there were approximately 164,000 legal filings of all types. The report/web page will also provide you a number to call if you ahve any questions. One obvious question is the number of medical malpractice filings in Utah in 2003. Call the Administrative Office of the Courts and ask to speak with someone in research. Once you get back you will find that in 2003 there were about 299 filings. Do the math. What med-mal crisis? I challenge any doctor or other party to call their state to find out how many filings there really are every year in their state. Then ask yourself, how many medical providers are in my state? How many procedures? How may prescriptions are written each year? How many other lawsuits are filed? How many people do supposedly charitable medical institutions sue because lower income people can’t pay their medical bills? Once you have done your homework, ask yourself, your provider and their insurance companies, how 300 lawsuits (or the number in your state) are driving up health care costs? If they say verdicts ask them how many verdicts were reduced and if they were not reduced why they were not (in other words what happened to the vicitm and/or their family)? Next ask everyone about the General Accounting Office (GAO) report released last year that states the med-mal crisis is not supported by the information they have received from the insurance industry and their research.
    Finally, the medical providers who may see this e-mail ask yourself who keeps on cutting your reimbursement schedules, limits how you practice, limits how you see patients and then ask yourself why you trust them? As P.T. Barnum said, there is a sucker born every minute and the insurance industry has really suckered the American people and the doctors who so ably serve our country.
    Oh, before you ask me, “No I do not make my living suing doctors. I’m just tired of all the false claims the medical industry is using to scare people in an effort to increase their profits!”

  • May 18, 2004 at 3:33 am
    Hugo Palacios says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    I don’t think the problem is so much one of frequency, but of severity. Of those 300 filings, about 20 percent (on average) probably were found in favor of the plaintiff. It would be interesting to find how much those verdicts costs insurance companies, because those verdicts then determine settlement amounts — which constitute a far greater number of resolved claims than cases that go to trial. I’m sure most companies might settle if faced with a bad outcome where a baby was involved but there was no negligence on the part of the doctor, mostly because cases like that routinely bring $20 million-plus verdicts.

    I believe that GAO report cited didn’t say much of anything — perhaps there were some bored pencil-pushers. I do remember a GAO report that said claim costs — and to a lesser degree decreased investment income — was the main factor behind escalating malpractice insurance premiums.



Add a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*