Posted on 07/25/2004 5:06:05 PM PDT by Land_of_Lincoln_John
INDIANAPOLIS (AP) Many Indiana obstetricians say medical malpractice insurance costs are becoming too high to stay in business, even though Indiana has among the lowest rates in the nation.
Dr. Lynda Smirz stopped delivering babies this month because she could not afford the increase in medical malpractice insurance costs.
A state fund created to keep malpractice rates low was almost depleted before the state Department of Insurance ordered a 73 percent increase for all physicians.
Jim McIntire, an attorney for the state medical association, says some doctors were on such tight budgets that the increase pushed them over the edge.
Opening new market for midwives...
Will they have to carry insurance too ?
I'm sure "high health care costs" will be a oft mentioned phrase at the DNC this week. And to think, the Dems could really do something about that, but will they forego those campaign contributions from trial lawyers? Naahhhhh!
We should start a class-action lawsuit against lawyers.
It's sometimes cheaper to pay up instead of fighting them and winning, let alone losing.
I'm not familiar with malpractice, but the legal bills for the CCW fight in Michigan (Constitutional Law attorney) for example were about $100,000 (District, Appeals, and Supreme Court Fight) I think the top attorney charged $500 an hour(Supreme Court level). We won though.
Anyone who has a baby without an experienced neonatologist present or nearby is utterly insane.
Indiana should just pass a comprehensive tort reform right now and end the stupidity.
Or we could follow up on Ann Coulter's idea of raising the tax-rate on contigency fees to 90%. That's one tax increase I support!
It's somewhat of a catch-22 situation. Midwives do less interventions, thus labor and delivery is generally lower stress on both mother and baby. Stress and multiple interventions, esp. administration of pitocin results in more complications. There have been a number of studies in this area. Having been an NICU nurse for 12 years, somewhere there needs to be a happy medium of knowing when intervention is necessary and having the skills/equipment needed. Sadly, doctors tend to over react and midwives under react. Added to this mix is the insurance company pressure to do every intervention conceivable so that in the event of a suit they can show they did everything they could. Conversely, the expections on the midwife are to do the least intervention possible. And sometimes, despite doing all the right stuff, the outcome is still bad, but the doctor or midwife gets sued anyway. My personal opinion is that the insurance companies shouldn't be dictating a doctors practice and medical decisions.
bump
Thank you, John Edwards.
I don't know, but I just get the feeling that it is the insurance companies or the loonie left behind it. Its sounds a bit tin-foil hat, I know,but I think there is a campaign against doctors. Look how they bad mouth doctors and even sometimes make them the bad guys in movies ala John Q. Remember that survey that came out last fall that said that nurses were more trusted than doctors? I know I don't trust nurses to diagnose me, that's for sure. They see the doctors as middle men and want to take them out of the process to cut costs. Doctors will only be needed for "extreme" cases. They start with underming their authority, with midwives and tell us its so much better to do it that way. Sheesh. There are people right now who are trying to make it legal for patients to order their own diagnostic tests instead of going through the doctor.
Eesh. I had a baby with meconium in the fluid and shoulder dystocia. The midwife did a superb job. Granted it was a hospital birth and she called in the neonatal team when she saw the meconium and they snatched him the second he came out - but if it had just been her I bet she still would have done a superb job.
Mrs VS
Thanks, John Edwards....
First let me say, I will not be voting for Kerry/Edwards.
With that being said, I think it is more accurate to say,
Thanks fellow citizens on the juries who believe the nonsense that trial lawyers such a John Edwards spew and find the doctors liable for damages.
Remember, it is not the trial lawyer that makes the decision.
The trial lawyer only presents one side of the case.
It has been the idiots on the juries that are responsible for the increase in liability insurance premiums.
Did Junk Science Make John Edwards Rich
By Marc Morano - CNSNews.com Senior Staff Writer
Edwards became one of America's wealthiest trial lawyers by winning record jury verdicts and settlements in cases alleging that the botched treatment of women in labor and their deliveries caused infants to develop cerebral palsy, a brain disorder that causes motor function impairment and lifelong disability.
Health care will remain unaffordable until the unlimited plaintiffs' awards are ended.
Medical malpractice cases should be channeled through a special court system, with juries comprised exclusively of physicians in the relevant area of specialization. That would quickly end the problem of the clueless, emotion-driven juries, and the careers of dramatic lying liability lawyers like Edwards. Physicians should all go on strike until this system is the law of the land.
The jury system was never intended to put simple-minded ignorant people in charge of second guessing the judgement of highly trained professional. People accused of wrongdoing are supposed to be tried by a jury of their PEERS. Some high school dropout who doesn't know the difference between a vein and an artery is most certainly not the peer of an obstetrician or neurosurgeon.
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.