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

Skip to comments.

Tort Reform will butcher "do no harm" (barf alert)
Atlanta Journal Constitution ^ | 02/17/05 | Jay Bookman

Posted on 02/17/2005 7:33:27 AM PST by Ravi

The "tort reform" bill approved by the Georgia Legislature and signed into law this week by Gov. Sonny Perdue may prove to be one of the most destructive pieces of legislation enacted in the state in years.

Senate Bill 3 cripples the legal system, not accidentally as a wayward scalpel might, but intentionally. It is designed to prevent juries from delivering the justice that they are charged to produce, even in the worst cases of malpractice by doctors and hospitals.

Even in the most egregious cases of incompetence or negligence, such as those that end in the unnecessary death or permanent paralysis of patients, the bill will limit damages for pain and suffering to no more than $350,000. That's a cheap price for a life. And in many cases arising out of emergency room care, the victims or their survivors will effectively have no legal recourse whatsoever.

The bill is outrageous for many reasons, not least because it was championed by conservative politicians who in other contexts love to preach about the importance of accountability, about making people take responsibility for their actions and mistakes. That's the argument they use in cutting social spending, in raising prison sentences, in making abortion less accessible: People must be made accountable.

But apparently, accountability is good only for the little people. As passage of this law demonstrates, those who are wealthy enough can buy themselves an exemption from the legal system, to ensure that they will not be held accountable in a court of law for the damages that they do. In every other line of work, from truck driving to running a restaurant, citizens are accountable if they cause death or injury. But not in the medical field.

(Excerpt) Read more at ajc.com ...


TOPICS: Extended News; Government; News/Current Events; US: Georgia
KEYWORDS: doctor; georgia; malpractice; physician; tortreform; triallawyer
This is my email to him earlier today:

Your tired and idiotic article sounded like talking points from a trial lawyer's mouth. I wonder if someone in your family makes a living suing doctors. You obviously have lost all reason with this article and are spewing hatred at doctors. When you're sick and need someone to take care of you, try calling a trial lawyer. See how far that gets you.

Texas passed an excellent law - you obviously didn't do your research (Dan Rather, Mary Mapes comparison here). Otherwise, you would be aware that TMLT (largest insurer of physicians in Texas) lowered their rates 12% the first year after passage of the law and 8% last year. 12 new insurers are coming into the market - that will drive down rates. But I'm sure you know nothing about competitive markets and how that keeps insurance rates down.

Also, cherrypicking states without caps - you mention Washington State. There too, neurosurgeons and OB's are closing up shop left and right. Let's look at two other states without caps - Pennsylvania and Illinois. There are about 3 or 4 orthopedic surgeons left in Pennsylvania in private practice under the age of 35. All others have left. As all the older orthopods retire, good luck finding anyone to fix your broken bone.

Illinois is a disaster. There are no neurosurgeons south of Springfield performing any neurosurgical procedures involving head trauma. So if you're unlucky enough to be involved in a car accident in southern Illinois and suffer a brain hematoma, your golden hour to get that treated becomes an ungolden four hours or longer. That's something to chew on.

I can tell you now in Georgia, OB's will start trickling in, Neurosurgeons will be more available and the overall healthcare quality will increase as a result of passage of this law. So be thankful you now live in a state where doctors want to come and practice. It may save your life.

So before you make random assertions without any evidence and merely spew democratic and trial lawyer talking points, it would be helpful if you did a little research. You may learn a thing or two even as a deputy editor.

With Best Regards

1 posted on 02/17/2005 7:33:32 AM PST by Ravi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Ravi

You PINNED his ears back very nicely. Poison pen letter PING!


2 posted on 02/17/2005 7:34:41 AM PST by HMFIC (Fourth Generation American INFIDEL and PROUD OF IT!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ravi

Oooo, that's gonna leave a mark. :)


3 posted on 02/17/2005 7:37:24 AM PST by L98Fiero
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: HMFIC

It is going to cripple lawyers ability to make a living. Baaahh!


4 posted on 02/17/2005 7:37:30 AM PST by Piquaboy (22 year veteran of the Army, Air Force and Navy, Pray for all our military .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Ravi

>> Even in the most egregious cases of incompetence or negligence, such as those that end in the unnecessary death or permanent paralysis of patients, the bill will limit damages for pain and suffering to no more than $350,000. That's a cheap price for a life.<<

That amounts to an outright lie. Unless this bill is worded drastically different than any other tort reform legislation I've ever seen AND AJC screwed up themselves by wrongfully inserting the phrase "for pain and suffering," the "price for a life" is added on TOP of the "pain and suffering" judgment.


5 posted on 02/17/2005 7:40:03 AM PST by dangus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ravi

>> The bill is outrageous for many reasons, not least because it was championed by conservative politicians <<

Wow. Blatant admission of ad hominem.


6 posted on 02/17/2005 7:40:47 AM PST by dangus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ravi

>> That's the argument they use in ... making abortion less accessible: People must be made accountable. <<

Typical screaming-Dean, Move-On style political smear: I thought we were trying to save lives. No, to the AJC, we're just interested in punishing naughty women.

I've been "optimistically" aiming at 57 or 58 Senate seats in '06; I'm getting the feeling 60 is doable.


7 posted on 02/17/2005 7:43:51 AM PST by dangus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: L98Fiero

No, sorry, but it won't. The person who opens the envelope will never read past, "Your tired and idiotic article" before crumpling it up and throwing it in a waste basket reserved for "extremist wingnuts."

It doesn't matter how excellent the rest of the article is if people don't read it.


8 posted on 02/17/2005 7:47:08 AM PST by dangus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Ravi

"It is designed to prevent juries from delivering the 'justice that they are charged to produce"

WRONG. Juries are not charged to "deliver justice". They are charged to protect both civil and criminal defendants from the power of the courts unless and until the plaintiff or prosecution proves his case against the defendant.

To put it in terms the author might understand, juries are shields. Not swords.


9 posted on 02/17/2005 7:50:07 AM PST by ConservativeDude
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dangus

"No, sorry, but it won't. The person who opens the envelope will never read past, "Your tired and idiotic article" before crumpling it up and throwing it in a waste basket reserved for "extremist wingnuts.""

So true, but hey, a man can dream, can't he? ;)


10 posted on 02/17/2005 7:57:22 AM PST by L98Fiero
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Ravi

"In addition, the medical industry is under enormous pressure to cut costs, reduce nursing staff, increase productivity and cram as many paying patients through the system as possible. Outside oversight to ensure quality control is almost nonexistent. The threat of a malpractice suit provided at least a modicum of pressure on the system to keep staffing levels up and procedures professional. Now that is gone."

He does not realize that much of this cost cutting is because hospitals, doctors cannot afford to pay malpractice insurance premiums as well as "keep staffing levels up."

As far as "Outside oversight to ensure quality control" is concerned, how many physicians oversee the scruples of overzealous ambulance-chasers? Tort reform will at least keep frivolous lawsuits out of lawyers' hands.


11 posted on 02/17/2005 8:00:54 AM PST by junaid
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dangus

I was so angry reading his diatribe that those were the first words that spilled out in my email. I should have edited that out. Oh well, I'll do that net time.


12 posted on 02/17/2005 8:32:49 AM PST by Ravi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Ravi

Searches don't reveal Bookman as a lawyer...wonder if he's married to one, or otherwise lives on shyster welfare?


13 posted on 02/17/2005 8:34:45 AM PST by Mamzelle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ravi

Thank, for the excellent post. I love the whine of "Lawyers in the Morning."


14 posted on 02/17/2005 9:02:14 AM PST by skinkinthegrass (Just because you're paranoid, doesn't mean they aren't out to get you :^)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ravi

Yoda wasn't THAT bad of an instructor.


15 posted on 02/17/2005 9:09:41 AM PST by dangus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Ravi

Notice how the only states that want to drive doctors away are Blue ones.


16 posted on 02/17/2005 9:36:03 AM PST by EQAndyBuzz (60 votes and the world changes.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ravi

Mr. Bookman issues the usual completely dishonest Trial Lawyer Industry press releases masquarading as news/commentary.


17 posted on 02/17/2005 11:06:35 AM PST by FormerACLUmember (Honoring Saint Jude's assistance every day.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All
Here is Mr. Bookman's reply to my email (I am emailing him back): I started looking into this issue with an open mind. I have no doctors or lawyers as friends or relatives, and have never sued anybody and hopefully never will. I have researched this extensively, and have found no factual basis for the story told by the doctors. I am aware of the act by the Texas insurer; I am also aware that the second largest insurer RAISED its rates in Texas after that law passed, explaining in its filing that non-economic damages account for only 1 percent of its cost structure. So I did my research. I just reached a different conclusion. The Government Accountability Office, the nonpartisan investigative arm of the federal government, did extensive research into claims such as those you level about doctors leaving, etc. It found NO factual basis for such claims, only repeated anecdotal stories. On its face, the claim that doctors are leaving medicine to go into some more lucrative field is ludicrous. With very warmest regards, Jay Ravi Pachigolla 02/17/05 09:15 AM To jbookman@ajc.com cc Subject You don't know anything about malpractice reform
18 posted on 02/17/2005 11:08:36 AM PST by Ravi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | 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