Health care reform cannot happen without malpractice reform
Meaningful health reform cannot happen without malpractice reform and for that Congress needs to take on the trial lawyers
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... 02816.html
July 31, 2009
Health-care reform is bogged down because none of the bills before Congress deals with the staggering waste of the current system, estimated to be $700 billion to $1 trillion annually. The waste flows from a culture of health care in which every incentive is to do more -- that's how doctors make money and that's how they protect themselves from lawsuits.
Yet the congressional leadership has slammed the door on solutions to the one driver of waste that is relatively easy to fix: the erratic, expensive and time-consuming jury-by-jury malpractice system. Pilot projects could test whether this system should be replaced with expert health courts, but leaders who say they want to cut costs will not even consider them.
What are they scared of? The answer is inescapable -- such expert courts might succeed and undercut the special interest of an influential lobby, the trial lawyers. An expeditious and reliable new system would compensate patients more quickly and at a fraction of the overhead of the current medical justice system, which spends nearly 60 cents of every dollar on lawyers' fees and administrative costs.
Re: Health care reform cannot happen without malpractice reform
I've been saying this for the longest. The healthcare industry, just like the economy, has blame spread out from the patients, to the doctors and the pharms. One of the big liability costs has to do with malpractice suits.
Re: Health care reform cannot happen without malpractice reform
Mike Malpractice suits opposed to common belief are rather hard to bring up against a doctor or a hospital. You have to prove the Doctor was negligent in his care. Most cases that go to trial are real and justified.
Re: Health care reform cannot happen without malpractice reform
It's a myth that malpractice lawsuits represent a huge share of the rising costs. As someone who has worked in the finance side of the healthcare industry, I can say this is bogus.
http://cherryhill.injuryboard.com/medic ... eid=267234
Also, it is a patient's right to sue if the doctor misdiagnosed or screwed up. For example, my parents live in Canada, which has capped patient liability claims. My dad got an infection from a botched surgery up there and my mom's cancer was misdiagnosed. It wouldn't have been worth suing the doctors in both cases because they reward would have been limited. If this happened here, my parents could have sued, my parents would have been rewarded for the damages and both doctors would have lost their licenses revoked.
Limiting malpractice suits wouldn't do much in reigning in costs and it would eliminate an essential check and balance in the system.
Re: Health care reform cannot happen without malpractice reform
Quote:
Originally Posted by T-Bird76
Mike Malpractice suits opposed to common belief are rather hard to bring up against a doctor or a hospital. You have to prove the Doctor was negligent in his care. Most cases that go to trial are real and justified.
True, yet there is a cost in simply bringing the case to court.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bonanzabucks
lso, it is a patient's right to sue if the doctor misdiagnosed or screwed up
The problem there is that this is SUE society. Look, the other day I was banging my head against a cinderblock when discussing a case with a patient's son. He was convinced a surgeon, who I dont even know, caused her to have a stroke while having cataract surgery. People have their own agendas, lawyers have their own agendas and ultimately, whether the case is win or lose, there is a cost. And the costs are only getting higher.
My insurance went up again last week, by $200 a month. Im in perfect health, non smoker, etc and I am paying for other people's BS. Likewise, there are a LOT of frivolous lawsuits. They may not go to trial, but there is a cost involved.
Here's a thought: If doctors could spend more time caring for their patients, instead of seeing more patients to pay for their malpractice coverage and worrying about when they will be sued, maybe people would get better care.
Re: Health care reform cannot happen without malpractice reform
Litigation, arbitration, and negotiation all cost $$ whether they simply file a few motions or go all the way to a full blown case heard in the courtroom. Having worked for lawyers who took medical malpractice suits, those cases consumed more time and more paperwork than any other kind of case except for large estate divorces and internal church lawsuits (says something about our culture, eh?). Even if the litigation process didn't add cost (which it does, even if it isn't significant), what definitely does contribute to the rising costs are the fact that doctors in the US run significantly more tests on the average patient (tests that in many cases are not considered to be needed) out of fear that they may be sued. And of course every test run means paying the doctor and her/his office staff, the folks who run the test (especially ones out of office), the manufactures who made the materials for the test...the list drags on. Hence, in my opinion, tort reform is at least worth seriously considering - if not necessary.
Re: Health care reform cannot happen without malpractice reform
Tort reform is a red hearing. Malpractice lawsuits and everything around it at most represents 10% of total healthcare costs. This also includes "defensive medicine" doctors do to double check everything and prevent lawsuits. The 10% figure is in the high end (and that's really, really pushing things up), but the costs generally accepted to be between 2%-5%. Not a whole lot and it doesn't make that much of a difference.
Speaking of which, 30 states have tort reform laws. Georgia, for example, has one of the toughest that they enacted on recommendation from the insurance industry. Did costs go down? NO. It didn't do a damn thing.
So, anyone who says tort reform is essential isn't do their research. I don't even know why this is always brought up since it's a fraction of the overall costs and won't change things in any way.
If you guys really want to know that represents the highest fraction of healthcare costs, it's salaries. Doctors make double here what they do in Europe (I was stunned at how little they make there, especially in Germany and Sweden). The only country I'm aware of where their salaries are fairly similar is Japan, but then they have a totally different system over there and doctors are paid based on the number of patients they see rather than how many procedures they run, which is how it works here. And Japan's overall healthcare costs are much lower than they are here.
Re: Health care reform cannot happen without malpractice reform
Quote:
So, anyone who says tort reform is essential isn't do their research. I don't even know why this is always brought up since it's a fraction of the overall costs and won't change things in any way.
Depends on how you structure your reforms, I suppose.
But I did do research.
May I recommend a read through a 2008 benchmark study done in MA on defensive medicine that ought to answer some of your concerns:
http://www.massmed.org/AM/Template.cfm? ... NTID=27797
Re: Health care reform cannot happen without malpractice reform
Quote:
Originally Posted by bonanzabucks
Tort reform is a red hearing. Malpractice lawsuits and everything around it at most represents 10% of total healthcare costs. This also includes "defensive medicine" doctors do to double check everything and prevent lawsuits. The 10% figure is in the high end (and that's really, really pushing things up), but the costs generally accepted to be between 2%-5%. Not a whole lot and it doesn't make that much of a difference.
Speaking of which, 30 states have tort reform laws. Georgia, for example, has one of the toughest that they enacted on recommendation from the insurance industry. Did costs go down? NO. It didn't do a damn thing.
So, anyone who says tort reform is essential isn't do their research. I don't even know why this is always brought up since it's a fraction of the overall costs and won't change things in any way.
If you guys really want to know that represents the highest fraction of healthcare costs, it's salaries. Doctors make double here what they do in Europe (I was stunned at how little they make there, especially in Germany and Sweden). The only country I'm aware of where their salaries are fairly similar is Japan, but then they have a totally different system over there and doctors are paid based on the number of patients they see rather than how many procedures they run, which is how it works here. And Japan's overall healthcare costs are much lower than they are here.
Even using your numbers, malpractice/tort reform is something that deserves serious consideration, if we can knock 10% of the cost of health care, that is a huge number.
Nobody has said that this is the silver bullet, but, it should be part of the package.
Comparing healthcare with Japan & the United States is two different animals, in Japan, about 60% of your paycheck goes to taxes, with no deductions :wink:
Re: Health care reform cannot happen without malpractice reform
Quote:
Nobody has said that this is the silver bullet, but, it should be part of the package.
Bingo. And as you mention, even if it is only 2-5% of total expenditures (which I'd like to see some sources on - because I haven't come across one yet that puts a figure below 10%), 2-5% of all medical expenditures is still an enormous chunk of change that could go toward other things.
