Frivolous Medical Malpractice Lawsuits
There is quite often a big discrepancy between perception and reality. A recent CNN poll asked respondents how much of a percentage of the federal budget certain federal programs received. For instance, people were asked to guess if Medicare got less than 1%, or between 1% and 5%, and so on and so on.
What was quite shocking to us was the amount of money that respondents thought went to the Corporation for Public Broadcasting. These are the folks who bring you NPR and PBS. Of all the respondents who took the poll, most of them thought that the CPB got between 1% and 5% of the federal budget.
If the Corporation for Public Broadcasting got 1% of the federal budget, it’s safe to say that Oscar the Grouch wouldn’t have to live in a trashcan anymore. He could live anywhere he wanted to in the world. Bert and Ernie could certainly have not only their own apartments, but probably their own mansions. And NPR and PBS could certainly stop giving those pledge drives that happen at least once a month.
In reality, the Corporation for Public Broadcasting gets about .0014% of the federal budget, which is around $506 million. While that isn’t small potatoes, it isn’t anywhere near 1% of the yearly federal budget.
We aren’t sure why people have this strange idea about how much public broadcasting costs in America, but we have one idea. Public broadcasting makes a popular target for groups and politicians who want to reduce federal spending, and when they attack it they continuously refer to it as a waste of money without specifically referring to how much it costs. People hear it being discussed constantly and assume that if it’s that big of a topic, then it must cost a lot. The politicians and groups who are against publically funded broadcasting know very well that it doesn’t cost all that much in comparison to defense or subsidies, but it makes for a good symbolic piñata, and so they rail against it every chance they get. And their constituents, who have heard nothing different, assume that the premise must be true.
It’s a neat little trick, and lots of people do it. You overstate or exaggerate the cost of something you don’t like, and all of a sudden this thing you don’t like is a “problem.” If you spin it the right way, then you can turn it into a “crisis.” And if people think it’s a “crisis,” then it will be much easier for them to act on this thing you don’t like.
Medical malpractice insurance companies don’t like medical malpractice lawsuits. Why would they? It costs them money. It costs them money even if the person filing the case loses. They have to pay for the legal costs and the experts and court fees. In a perfect world, they would simply collect premiums and simply never have to go to court at all.
Believe it or not, this is practically the set up they have for themselves in a few states. For instance, Texas is so loaded with damage caps and exemptions on who can be found liable for malpractice that most people can’t even afford to file a malpractice lawsuit anymore. And it got to be that way because the medical malpractice insurance industry was able to convince people that this thing that they didn’t like (our civil court system) was actually a “crisis.”
They jacked up their premium rates and blamed it all on a deluge of frivolous lawsuits. They claimed that our court system was being log jammed with worthless cases involving people who weren’t really injured at all. And they claimed that people were just making millions of dollars on medical malpractice lawsuits. Legislatures then enacted restrictions and caps on damages not just in Texas but in states all over the country. So now malpractice insurance companies don’t have to worry about actually performing the business that they elected to go into of their own free will.
The obvious problem with all this (besides the fact that legitimately injured medical malpractice victims have either diminished recourse or none at all) is that this “crisis” wasn’t legitimate at all. There never was an onslaught of malpractice lawsuits, and the courts weren’t log jammed with frivolous medical malpractice lawsuits. In fact, the numbers that are out now are not significantly different than the numbers then, yet for some reason the insurance companies received protections that citizens aren’t entitled to.
Medical malpractice cases account for less than 8% of tort cases, and less than 2% of civil cases nationwide. That doesn’t sound like a “logjam” to us. Between 2000 and 2009, the number of medical malpractice cases actually dropped 18%. That doesn’t sound like an explosion to us. And even if the verdict is for a headline grabbing “millions of dollars,” the plaintiff’s in a medical malpractice case usually actually collect much less.
But that wasn’t what you heard, was it? And it certainly isn’t what you hear now. These folks have figured out that if you just repeat the same thing over and over again, people will eventually believe it. After all, NPR gets tens of billions of taxpayer dollars a year, right?
Greenberg and Bederman is a Washington, D.C. based medical malpractice law firm with offices in Silver Spring and Baltimore, Maryland. We also offer legal assistance to those who have been injured by doctors in Northern Virginia. If you or a loved one in D.C, Virginia or Maryland has been hurt by a doctor, nurse or other medical professional, contact Greenberg & Bederman for a free medical malpractice consultation.
.jpg)