Obama On Medical Malpractice

Posted on September 15, 2009 by Greenberg & Bederman

 

The President Speaks Wisely on Medical Malpractice

Many tort reform advocates (in other words, insurance companies and the politicians that they help fund) had reason for optimism during President Obama’s speech to Congress on September 9th. There was what appeared to be a concession towards malpractice reform in the text of the speech:

“Finally, many in this chamber – particularly on the Republican side of the aisle – have long insisted that reforming our medical malpractice laws can help bring down the cost of health care. I don't believe malpractice reform is a silver bullet, but I have talked to enough doctors to know that defensive medicine may be contributing to unnecessary costs. So I am proposing that we move forward on a range of ideas about how to put patient safety first and let doctors focus on practicing medicine. I know that the Bush Administration considered authorizing demonstration projects in individual states to test these issues. It's a good idea, and I am directing my Secretary of Health and Human Services to move forward on this initiative today.”

This might have made ears perk up over in the tort reform section of Congress and K Street, but the holy grail of tort reform (that is, caps on all sorts of damages from punitive to non-economic to even economic damages) is actually not something that the Obama administration thinks is a good idea. This was re-iterated in an interview on 60 Minutes on Sunday.

 

"What I would be willing to do is to consider any ideas out there that would actually work in terms of reducing costs, improving the quality of patient care…So far the evidence I've seen is that caps will not do that."

We agree completely. In the first place, there is no evidence that instituting caps on the amount of damages that victims of medical malpractices can receive will do anything to lower health care costs. This premise has been floated before. Back in 2004, President Bush claimed that:

“One of the major cost drivers in the delivery of health care are these junk and frivolous lawsuits. The risk of frivolous litigation drives doctors -- and hear me out on this -- they drive doctors to prescribe drugs and procedures that may not be necessary, just to avoid lawsuits. That's called the defensive practice of medicine.”

But President Bush was using statistics that were then questioned by the Government Accounting Office and the Congressional Budget Office due to the fact that these numbers came from study that only covered a miniscule element of health care and then compared it to the entire health care system. So in this case, the President said one thing, but the guys in charge of the checkbooks said another entirely.

Oddly enough, tort costs are the one element in health care that haven’t gone up. While everything else from doctor visits to MRI’s are getting more and more expensive, the one thing that hasn’t gone up in price or number are malpractice suits. The number of malpractice suits per year has remained constant for decades, and so have the payouts, even after you adjust them for inflation.

Another study claims that malpractice costs are averaging $30.4 billion per year, which seems like a lot until you realize two things: First, the majority of that $30.4 billion is due to premiums, not payouts. Secondly, while $30.4 billion seems like an astronomical number, bear in mind that we have a $2 trillion health care system. $30.4 billion adds up to 1% of that. Surely there are better places to cut costs than the amount an injury victim can receive, which is what insurers want.

This is what the argument boils down to after all. Should there be a limit on the amount of money that someone who was a victim of medical malpractice can receive? Should that limit be $200,000, no matter what? If a surgeon removes the wrong limb? If a doctor misdiagnoses an easily recognizable illness and the victim spends six months in the hospital as a result? If the patient is the victim of unforgivable medical incompetence and his life is irrevocably altered as a result? If the victim is so damaged by medical malpractice or a violation of the standard of care that he is unable to live a normal life? Is all that only worth $200,000?

We don’t think so. And we are sure that all of the victims who we have successfully represented inmedical malpractice cases in DC, Maryland or Virginia don’t think so either.  

If you or a loved one has been injured due to the actions of a doctor, surgeon or other medical professional in the Washington, D.C. area, contact Greenberg and Bederman for a free medical malpractice legal consultation today.

Tags: , , ,