Personal Injury Resources

I’ve written before about medical malpractice and the rising costs for physicians of all specialties. One of the things we as physicians really fear is malpractice lawsuits by patients. We are taught in medical school and in training that the number one way to prevent a lawsuit is to talk to the patient and address their concerns.

Well, it’s really kind of non-news, but the fact that this type of testimony is present in medical malpractice cases just gives me even more encouragment to get really good at my options trading.

The Massachusetts case represents one of the largest awards in the state’s history (bracketed by record awards of $30 million in 1992 and $40 million in 2005 for medical malpractice resulting in massive brain injuries to newborns.) Unlike the OJ case and the medical cases, however, the lawsuit of the elderly women involved no death or physical harm; it was a contract dispute between two unknown co-authors and their tiny publisher.

California-based lecturer and author Dr. Judith Reisman, who has served as an expert witness in lawsuits involving sex abuse, explains why Catholic clergy and laity have every right to sue for Medical malpractice, all those involved in the promotional use of sex therapy centers to cure the clerics who were accused of sex abuse.

The floor was then opened to audience questions (pre-approved, of course). There was one on medical malpractice suits (how do we get rid of all these horrible, frivolous lawsuits?). There was a question on illegal immigration. One about reducing our dependence on foreign oil. So on and so forth.

The current system of residency training, like the Marine Corps of the early 1980s, was organized for a different era and a different kind of person. The resident of the 1950s was with few exceptions a young, geeky, unmarried male who’s career was an uninterrupted arc from high school to college to medical school to residency, free from the encumberances of marriage, family, and outside resposibilities that are almost the norm today. Not only that but as medicine was not as highly specialized or even as advanced as it is today a single year of internship was all that was required for a physician to set himself up in private practice. Since medical malpractice suits were almost unheard of and the dangerous interventions that physicians could even attempt were few and mostly the purview of the few specialists, most physicians felt comfortable hanging up their shingles after even this limited training.

There's a very strong growing body of evidence, that 19th Century pro-life reformers had it right when they called abortion "medical malpractice."

I was surprized by Bush’s priorities to be addressed. Laws preventing frivilous medical malpractice lawsuits, tax breaks for those with employer-provided insurance, and a overall decrease of oil dependence by 20% seem like good things to work towards! I must admit that i have my reservations that any of those things will be accomplished with the overall result being for the greater good.

A couple of other cases merit mention. In Celmer v. Rodgers, the 11th District had upheld the trial court’s allowing an expert witness to testify in a medical malpractice case, despite the fact that he hadn’t practiced in seven months. The court adopted a loose interpretation of Evidence Rule 601(D)’s requirement that an expert in such a case had to “devote at least one-half of his or her professional time to the active clinical practice in his or her field of licensure,” finding that the rule was more directed toward determining the expert’s past experience rather than present activity.

He compares the Bush administration’s unwillingness to engage in ‘talks’ with Iran as the equivalent to ‘medical malpractice’, using as evidence the 6+2 talks on Afghanistan and an Iranian “overture” to the United States in early 2003 as diplomatic success stories. Both of these claims are stupid.

Tom spoke more about a measure adopted in a special session in late 2004 regarding medical malpractice insurance. The result of this special session was an HMO tax that would pay for a reinsurance fund that is to sunset in 2010 after payouts totaling about $120 million. The cause of this special session was two consecutive large premium increases from Maryland’s largest malpractice insurer. With doctors unable to change their payouts from the various health insurance providers to the degree necessary to absorb this increase, they had little choice but to drop out of various specialties, in particular obstetrics.

I think we should make medical malpractice claims harder to file and raise the bar for proving wrongdoing. I believe we need to insulate pharmaceutical companies from exorbitant legal costs arising from unforseen complications of new drugs. The way I see it is if the FDA approved this medication for the public then they should share in the cost of any legal ramifications later. This would dramatically reduce the cost to medical professionals, health care provider and pharmacutical companies.

The exemption has been controversial, and Lott is reviving an old debate. The issue is not (and this may disappoint Mr. Lott) whether nice distinctions between flood damage and storm damage after a hurricane reflect positively on the insurance industry. The problem is that much of the insurance industry is not effectively regulated. The exemption from federal antitrust laws goes much further than the state-action doctrine and ties only to the existence of a state statute, without requiring actual state regulation or effective oversight. This low standard (established in 1958 by the Supreme Court in FTC v. National Casualty Co.) means that purely private collusion that harms competition remains unchecked either by real state regulation and oversight or the federal antitrust laws. The “boycott, coercion or intimitadation” clause provides little or no protection, as it is accepted that insurances may coordinate in the development of forms—Section 1 of the Sherman Act does not apply, for example, if insurance companies agree among themselves to exclude flood damage from home-owners insurance policies. (The Supreme Court did consider it a boycott when three insurance companies agreed no longer to offer medical malpractice insurance at all, leaving a fourth insurance company in a position to dictate terms to the insureds. St. Paul Fire & Marine Ins. Co. v. Barry.) And who can seriously say that the modern insurance industry isn’t engaged in interstate commerce?

But, like all industries, the law, and in particular medical malpractice representation, is a commodity. And like all commodities there are a few high quality providers and a great many shabby ones. Unfortunately, finding a good medical malpractice attorney isn’t quite as a simple as finding a cheap price, rather, it’s a lot like finding a good car mechanic.

In a regulatory filing to the Texas Department of Insurance, GE Medical Protective sought to justify why the insurer planned to raise physicians’ premiums 19 percent just six months after Texas enacted a cap on awards. In 2003, Texas law makers passed a $250,000 cap on non-economic damage compensation to victims of medical malpractice after GE Medical Protective and other insurers lobbied for the change. The cap is substantially similar to the one proposed by President Bush.

Despite promises that rising medical malpractice insurance rates would be suppressed under new state laws, many of Georgia’s insurers have hiked their premiums since the sweeping reforms took effect last year, according to an Associated Press analysis of state insurance records.

President Bush on Monday in a speech to the American Hospital Association called for limits on medical malpractice lawsuits, despite the fact that Bush’s proposals are written for special interests and would not significantly reduce health care costs.�

Keep in mind that not only do they account for 15% of all payouts, they also force insurance companies and doctors to pay millions of dollars in legal bills to defend themselves. All of this contributes to the rising cost of health care.

The Republican philosophy is, if someone cuts off the wrong leg, it’s your problem and not the person’s who did it to you:

The soaring cost of medical malpractice insurance has forced many doctors to give up their practice and has shrunk the number of specialists, such as neurosurgeons, who are available to emergency departments. One doctor said he had 20 specialists on call five years ago. Today he has four. This is true in many hospitals throughout the nation.

The authors go on to provide abundant evidence of profound mismanagement. The more you read, the worse it sounds, despite the fact that it was written in a dispassionate and objective style. If anything, they are too gentle. After stating that their investigations "suggest" that the Bank wasted money and lives, they document six instances of exactly that.

This take action petition will help you contact your members of congress to ask them to help put a stop to the deceptive practices of these phony clinics -- that are being funded to the tune of $60 million of your tax dollars, btw -- so I hope you'll consider sending this to your representatives, or contacting them on your own about this important issue.

Rep. John F. Cox (D-Lowell) was fined $1,750 for accepting gratuities from John Hancock lobbyist F. William Sawyer, Medical Malpractice Joint Underwriting Association of Massachusetts lobbyist George Traylor, and Life Insurance Association of Massachusetts lobbyist William Carroll. According to a Disposition Agreement, Rep. Cox admitted he violated the conflict law by accepting meals for himself and his wife totalling $125 from insurance lobbyists during a trip to Las Palmas del Mar Resort in Puerto Rico in December 1992; and by accepting dinner for himself and his wife and golf totalling $334 during a trip to Plantation Resort at Amelia Island, Florida in March 1993. Rep. Cox also admitted he violated the conflict law by accepting a fishing boat excursion for himself and his wife worth $128 from Traylor in December 1992.

Am a little disappointed that the JS’s Madison Bureau team didn’t also look up how much Lautenschlager’s taken from the trial lawyer lobby. According to the Wisconsin Democracy Campaign, Peg’s taken over $138,000 from lawyers. How many of them are trial lawyers is another question all together?

“I’m starting my business as a certified coach for doctors. When doctors have communication issues or want a more profitable practice, they call me. I work with them to eliminate stress—from relationship problems to medical malpractice risk, because the problems are usually communication-based.

Lynn Swann visited the at Moravian Hall Square in Northampton County today to talk about the costs of medical malpractice suits in Pennsylvania and his support for the Fair Share Act, which would reduce frivolous lawsuits:

The primary reason health care costs go up is because of lawsuit abuse which needs IMMEDIATE attention from capital hill. This is the very thing the federal government could do something about. Why the state governments haven't dealt with this, I do not know. ANY state which would pass tort reform in medical malpractice would become an instant magnet for physicians who want to focus on practicing medicine and making a decent profit.

The third wish was for efforts to tackle the problems of malpractice litigation - TED responded by building a blog, thismakesmesick.com, which has helped mobilize efforts and brought Fischell into dialog over Maryland’s new medical malpractice laws.

Sean Sirrine at Objective Justice posted Hospital Requires Patient to Sue to Receive her Medical Records, discussing a bizarre medical malpractice case in which a Florida woman has been required by Orlando Regional Healthcare Systems to sue them in order to find out why all her limbs were amputated when she went to a hospital to give birth to her son.

Humorously, he then wonders how we’ll control costs. This is coming from a man who has made expansion of health care technology a priority. Medical technology advancement is, of course, one of the major driving forces behind health care inflation. Of course, Burns prefers to blame medical malpractice suits, even though, in practice, their impact is overstated.

Considering that this is America (which means “Land of the Lawyers” in Potawatomi) this is a very important question. If the assisted suicide does not work and results in additional pain and suffering of the patient and it can be proven that this was a result of improper procedure, prescribing, and/or monitoring then it should fall into the venue of medical malpractice (ironically). As with question #6 if the patient is unable to give consent for any reason then the physician cannot be held liable for not going through with the assisted suicide in accordance with the law.

The Wisconsin Supreme Court is continuing on its quest to dismantle any sensible litigation protection left in Wisconsin. It started a while back with its lifting of medical malpractice caps and the destructive lead paint ruling. Now this:

If Doyle has a number in mind that he would sign, why won’t he tell the legislature? It seems that he wants them to keep passing bills with random numbers until he decides that one is acceptable. Is that what he calls “leadership?” If he thinks that the number should be $800,000 or $900,000 or $1,000,000 or whatever, he should say it so that the legislature can stop wasting their time and the taxpayers’ money.

Following is a summary and guidance for West Virginia human resource managers on retaliatory discharge related claims faced by health care providers. The summary was prepared by my colleague, Ben Salango, a partner at Flaherty, Sensabaugh & Bonasso, PLLC. Ben's a member of our Health Care Practice Group and focuses on medical malpractice and employment litigation.

Check out Kevin’s review of Tom Baker’s new book, The Medical Malpractice Myth. AEI, of all places, is hosting an event on the book December 19.

Gov. Jim Doyle today vetoed new caps on pain and suffering damages to victims of medical malpractice, saying they weren’t different enough from the previous set of limits to pass constitutional muster.

Maybe next time I visit the dentist I will come with my own props; props that even out the equation – my own special instruments. I’m thinking a butcher knife or medical malpractice paperwork in one hand for a negative answer, and my credit card in the other hand for a positive answer.

While medical malpractice is a problem, its costs account for less than 1 percent of spending. And defensive medicine, where doctors run tests or do procedures to lower their chances of being sued, makes up no more than 9 percent of total spending, the study of spending in 30 nations found.

I am continually disappointed and confused by the medical malpractice insurance industry’s aversion to novel strategies to reduce claims and modify underwriting methodologies. The debate about apology and disclosure is a prime example. Resisters to to apology programs offer no data supporting the widespread, dogmatic position of apology avoidance… a position promoted for nearly 30 years by the risk management industry… and reflective of both a policy and mindset that has contributed significantly to the poor state of affairs in the industry.

Hungary, as other countries which are common destination for medical tourism, has weak medical malpractice law. Some hospitals in the country could no longer get malpractice insurance from insurance companies because simply there were too many malpractice cases happened.

A new study by the Commonwealth Fund found significantly higher rates of medical error in the United States than in five other countries. Any serious approach to restraining medical malpractice costs has to address the error issue first. Comsumeraffairs.com has a good summary of the study.

This years debate resolution is “medical malpractice must be significantly reformed in the US”. I have been doing a lot of research on both the affirmative, and negative side, trying to make sure I know both sides of the case, so I can debate both sides well. It is a lot of work but at least its interesting.

The research seems to include federal contributions only, and given that the stated reason for the rise in doctor’s donations is the medical malpractice issue (which is a state law issue, too) it would be interesting to know if similar trends are evident in state campaign giving, and whether there are differences among jurisdictions.

In a letter faxed to Pinellas-Pasco County State Attorney Bernie McCabe, Bush said Michael Schiavo testified in a 1992 medical malpractice trial that he found his wife collapsed at 5 a.m., and he said in a 2003 television interview that he found her about 4:30 a.m. He called 911 at 5:40 a.m.

“Patients receiving only two drugs are more likely to fail treatment, become sicker, and die,” says Paul Volberding, MD, chair of the HIVMA Board of Directors. “Three-drug regimens are the standard of care in the United States. Mississippi’s two-drug limit is not only unethical, it amounts to medical malpractice.”

Re-igniting the medical malpractice overhaul debate, a new study by Dartmouth College researchers suggests that huge jury awards and financial settlements for injured patients have not caused the explosive increase in doctors' insurance premiums.

Over the last 20 years these medical dramas have been sprouting up in the landscape of television like weeds in my neighbor’s garden during the summer. Is there any correlation with the increase in medical television shows to the 1288% increase in malpractice lawsuits? I would argue yes at least partly. Although there are many different reasons for an increase medical malpractice costs, there is a common thread, an increase in the magnitude of lawsuits.

When it comes to patients in general, the medical profession that's charged with taking care of our individual health care is freaking out about rising awards in medical malpractice claims, which happen when one of them injures a patient. But the skyrocketing costs of malpractice insurance aren't actually caused by rising claims, and appear tied more closely to fast rising healthcare costs. Yet they order wasteful tests out of an irrational fear, anyway. The AMA doesn't want you to look at the numbers behind the curtain or suggest that they revoke...

Wow … this is really going to be a ramble! Fast forward to age 49 when just by chance I end up going to a pulmonary specialist as a primary care physician who routinely administers pulmonary function tests to all patients…regardless. I felt fine; I had no problems breathing but the PFT showed COPD – Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary disease. The good doc says, “You’ve gotta quit smoking.” I didn’t want to do it! I thought I enjoyed it! And then the governor of the state raised the taxes on cigarettes to help pay for Pennsylvania doctors’ medical malpractice insurance. That was the straw that broke the camel’s back! Since I felt fine, I couldn’t accept the doctor’s advice; but when it hit my pocket book – I took a good, hard look at it and decided it was time to give it up.

Vermont physicians believe the cost of medical malpractice insurance recently approved by a state regulatory agency spells trouble for both local doctors and their patients.

This has perverse consequences. According to the Institute of Medicine, a non-governmental organisation in Washington, DC, preventable medical errors--from unplanned drug interactions, say--kill between 44,000 and 98,000 people each year in America alone. This makes medical snafus the eighth leading cause of death, ahead of car accidents, breast cancer and AIDS. "It's like crashing two 747s a day," says Mark Blatt, who was a family doctor for 20 years before he joined Intel, the world's

Jim Garvin has a good post on the regulation of medical malpractice insurance (see here). Our experience in the specialty lines market is that freedom from rate and form regulation (ie the surplus lines) provides significantly greater liquidity in the market than the segment of the market requiring rate and form filings (the admitted market).

I'm just saying, how can you have an honest discussion about medical malpractice reform without addressing those real errors made by doctors. There's a mentality that permeates the medical profession whereby decent doctors are reluctant to point out mistakes made by other doctors. That's where I see a need for reform. Any reform that doesn't include that just looks doctors seeking.... well, I don't even want to say.

Legal reform doesn't preclude medical reform. But right now, the legal system is sufficiently inaccurate with respect to medical malpractice that any improvements in the medical system wouldn't fix the problem of the costs imposed by the legal system. It's almost an entirely separate issue.

Poor communication and mismanaged expectations between doctors and patients are chief among the forces behind the rapidly increasing number of medical malpractice lawsuits. In an effort to help health care providers lower the incidence and severity of malpractice claims, Aon has partnered with Rightfield Solutions, LLC, to offer Emmi, a cutting-edge patient education and communication system.

An article by the Nashua Telegraph on the NH Senate Judiciary Committee's hearing on their proposed medical malpractice bill that would drastically limit the people's ability to obtain medical negligence justice in New Hampshire.

In the UK, if you're found to have filed a frivolous case, you have to pay all the legal fees. I'm told that works pretty well. But what if the problem isn't necessarily with the filees? This 2002 report by Public Citizen seems to indicate that a significant bulk of claims are filed against repeat offenders. Slightly over half of all medical malpractice claims are made against doctors with two or more claims, and fully 16.5% of those claims are made against those with...

Other clients from whom Tehin stole settlement money included two medical malpractice victims and two claimants in a will contest. (ph)

" "The Washington Post takes a detailed look at a single medical malpractice case--one that began when Dr. Kevin Kearney of Maryland's Eastern Shore urged an 18-year-old mother to have her baby without a Caesarean section. What followed was a complicated delivery resulting in permanent injuries to the child, and a multi-year legal battle, filled with dramatic moments that illustrate how an unreliable system can fail both doctors and patients." "

Just 5 percent of American doctors are responsible for half the malpractice in the United States, according to a new analysis of federal data by the consumer group Public Citizen.

Isn’t it interesting how Bush is willing to meet with groups who support capping medical malpractice payouts, but has repeatedly refused to meet with patients who have been actual victims of malpractice? Surprised?

Contrary to reports from those who oppose patients’ rights, data used in this map clearly demonstrate that the number of doctors has risen in every state, every year over the last three years. Moreover, in the five states that recently passed new medical malpractice caps—MS, NV, OH, OK, and TX—premiums still rose at nearly double the rate of states that did not pass a damage cap.

Conflicting sides of the medical malpractice debate have come to an agreement - both oppose new state Senate legislation addressing the issue.