Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Study: Fear of Litigation Has 'Stunning Impact' on Doctors, Health Care
CNSNEWS ^ | 4/18/02 | Christine Hall

Posted on 04/18/2002 12:01:28 PM PDT by Tumbleweed_Connection

America's health care system is hurt by a modern "legal lottery" system that doles out huge damage awards to a few litigants and warps the medical decision-making of doctors, according to a new coalition of reform-minded, big-name Democrats and Republicans called "Common Good."

The system "subsidize[s] lawyers" instead of improving health care, said former Republican U.S. House Speaker Newt Gingrich.

The "Common Good" boasts as members prominent Democrats like former presidential candidate George McGovern, former U.S. Senator Paul Simon, and former Deputy Attorney General Eric Holder. Republican members include Gingrich, former U.S. Senator Alan K. Simpson, and Hoover Institution scholar Shelby Steele.

Armed with new polling data showing doctors running scared from the threat of lawsuits, the group's ambitious undertaking is to come up with a plan for reforming American jurisprudence on health care matters. In short, they will be looking for a plan that reverses the trend of malpractice lawsuits that drive up the cost of health care and stifles medical innovations and information sharing.

According to a new study by Harris Interactive, which surveyed 500 doctors, nurses and hospital administrators, the overwhelming majority of physicians (83 percent) and hospital administrators (72 percent) do not trust the justice system to produce a reasonable result in lawsuits.

As a result, the study finds, 79 percent of doctors acknowledge ordering more medical tests than what they think is needed; 74 percent refer patients to specialists more often than needed; and 61 percent have noticed other physicians being reluctant to make what they believe to be humane choices for terminally ill patients.

Tens of billions of dollars of health care dollars are wasted on these unnecessary costs, said Harris Interactive chairman and CEO Gordon Black. "It's part of the cost of litigation."

"Americans are losing their trust in justice," said Lawyer Phillip Howard, the group's founder. "The common sense to run hospitals and classrooms has been replaced by legal fear."

Howard acknowledges that the trial lawyers who benefit from the current system will fight Common Good's efforts every step of the way. So will Ralph Nader, who has "made a career out of attacking the establishment," Howard predicted. But he's hoping most interest groups will climb on board for most of the Common Good agenda.

Exactly what that agenda will entail, however, is still to be determined.

Gingrich suggests creating a new adjudication process for handling legal claims -- a special court comprised of medical experts who would decide malpractice cases. Then, if a patient is dissatisfied with the court's decision, he or she could appeal the decision to the regular court system, accompanied by all the information gleaned from the medical court's decision. Gingrich hopes this would cut down on bad decisions made by citizen juries.

Carlton Carl, spokesman for the Association of Trial Lawyers of America, calls Common Good's agenda a thinly disguised effort by the business community to cap some losses.

Common Good is "obviously being started by [law firm] Covington and Burlington, which represents the tobacco industry and other clients that don't like being held accountable when they are responsible for injuring consumers and workers," said Carl.

In the minds of officials from pharmaceutical and tobacco companies and manufacturers, "consumers and workers are the enemy," said Carl. "The only litigation problem that these huge corporations see is lawsuits by [consumers].

"They have no problem with businesses suing other businesses, which is the majority of litigation," Carl added. "Businesses suing businesses is all about helping business."

He also disputes the allegation by Common Good that the fear of litigation drives up the cost of health care.

"Hopefully, the fear of it makes doctors more careful about what they do," said Carl. "The doctors are now saying they are paying much higher [malpractice insurance] premiums because of litigation. It's not because of litigation," it's because of losses from business investments, said Carl.

For example, he said, St. Paul Companies, Inc., which insures against medical malpractice, lost $108 million in the financial collapse of energy giant Enron.

Trial lawyers maintain that the legal system is not broken because judges are already empowered to throw out merit-less claims, jury decisions may be appealed, and trial lawyers working on contingency fees do not take on weak cases.

"Interests paying these people [associated with Common Good] are the very people, corporations, which have invested billions of dollars to convince the American people that juries are out of control, that there's a litigation lottery, that these cases are clogging the courts," said Carl. "Of course they say people don't trust the system [because these interests] have invested a lot of money to make sure people don't trust the system."


TOPICS: Miscellaneous
KEYWORDS: healthcare; litigation

1 posted on 04/18/2002 12:01:28 PM PDT by Tumbleweed_Connection
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Tumbleweed_Connection
B-B-b-but passing a law like this would put people like John Edwards out of business. Oh, wait,... he has another job now (and will get to vote to kill this one!).
2 posted on 04/18/2002 12:18:30 PM PDT by Gritty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tumbleweed_Connection
One of the problems that will need to be corrected is the fact that malpractice lawsuits are the only real check on incompetent doctors.
3 posted on 04/18/2002 12:20:39 PM PDT by balrog666
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: balrog666
That's because the peer review process is a joke. No one involved in the "review" is going to be too critical because they might be next. How about the many instances where medical licenses have been revolved in one state, but the doctor just goes somewhere else and starts all over again. I think you can improve the system(s) without paying extortion to the lawyers.
4 posted on 04/18/2002 12:50:32 PM PDT by bballbob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Tumbleweed_Connection
Stunning impact on doctors? Yes. I abandoned medicine altogether.
5 posted on 04/18/2002 12:51:32 PM PDT by Savage Beast
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tumbleweed_Connection
Stunning impact on health care? Yes. Nobody can afford it.
6 posted on 04/18/2002 12:52:59 PM PDT by Savage Beast
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tumbleweed_Connection
I have this to say: it is the very concern about the possibility of litigation that has sent the price of perscription medicine through the roof here in the USA. Now you know why Claritin and Allegra--both allergy medicines that actually have less side effects than over-the-counter antihistimine cold/allergy medicines--are still sold only on a perscription basis here in the USA, while both drugs mentioned are sold over the counter in Canada and parts of Europe.
7 posted on 04/18/2002 12:54:15 PM PDT by RayChuang88
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bballbob
Sure you can. Just publish the names of doctors who abuse drugs and patients and practice badly in a newspaper, the same way that nurses are. Make it available to the public, the way it is for nurses in my state. Publish full names, and locations, and the facilities where they practice, the way they do for nurses in my state.

That'll cut down on malpractice, I guarantee it.

8 posted on 04/18/2002 12:54:53 PM PDT by Judith Anne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Kikero
PING!

heheh.

9 posted on 04/18/2002 12:56:22 PM PDT by diotima
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bballbob
Put it this way: If given the choice between (1) affordable health care with no option to sue and (2) the present insane system, I'll take option #1 anytime--for myself AND my family--and I know the health care3 system very well. Obviously, I don't have that choice. None of us does.
10 posted on 04/18/2002 12:59:03 PM PDT by Savage Beast
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Tumbleweed_Connection
Three Words:

Cap The Settlements

11 posted on 04/18/2002 1:06:04 PM PDT by realpatriot71
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: balrog666
One of the problems that will need to be corrected is the fact that malpractice lawsuits are the only real check on incompetent doctors

On the other hand malpractice suits feed the ever-growing population of predatory lawyers hustling frivolous cases.

It’s time for the losers to pay all the costs of both plaintiff and defendant. I once got a notice that I was part of a class action suit against a hardware company started by a kid who couldn’t figure out how to setup a ZIP drive. The class action asked if I wanted to participate or be removed from the suit. I would have had to travel to Pennsylvania (600 miles) to remove myself from the suit where the case was filed. Otherwise, I had to notify the plaintiffs attorneys to include me, which would just take a call to their Boston office. The notice was clearly lopsided in favor of the interests of the plaintiff’s ATTORNEYS. The whole system is set up for their benefit. None of these pickpockets ever put their lives on the line for the people. They prey on the wealth of productive businessmen and the public trough. I await the day they screw things up so badly that the indifferent rise up and tar and feather the bastards.

12 posted on 04/18/2002 2:02:51 PM PDT by LoneRangerMassachusetts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: LoneRangerMassachusetts
On the other hand malpractice suits feed the ever-growing population of predatory lawyers hustling frivolous cases.

"Loser pays" is a good start. Slapping lawyers with punitive judgements for frivolous lawsuits is another good step. A hunting season on lawyers might not even be out of bounds in some cases.

But, with respect to the malpractice issue, punishing medical incompetents cannot be left to the AMA.
13 posted on 04/18/2002 2:10:38 PM PDT by balrog666
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: balrog666
What is really crazy is the fact that a large portion of our population believes that health care is a right (I'm paging through the Constitution now, paging, paging...). Health care used to be considered a service that was offered for those who needed it (and could pay for it) and now it has become something entirely different. Why can't we return to a truly capitalistic version of medicine where the free market decides? The reality of Review Boards is that one of the best that money can buy is the one of "free and informed choice" by the consumer. Licensing and practice fees could more than offset a forum which monitors credentials as well as welcomes and includes patient feedback, concerns or judgements.
14 posted on 04/18/2002 2:25:58 PM PDT by jettester
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson