Doctors, Lawyers, Insurance, Oh My

I've been following the story about the trauma center in Las Vegas with some interest. Particularly since I happened to be in Las Vegas on a poker-playing jaunt one time when my brother in law had a bad fall and ended up in this now-closed trauma center for spine work. When I went to visit him, he looked like one of the better-off patients. (He recovered well.) Anyway, the story linked below has a lot of issues in it. It's not clear that what the doctors want the legislature to do will lower their malpractice bills a whole lot. The one doctor is also saying that docs can't get a malpractice policy over $1 million. This is kind of scary because when a spine surgeon commits real malpractice, $1 million is a drop in the bucket. Even if pain and suffering awards are limited to 250,000, other damages in a lot of cases can be millions. In a previous article a prominent Las Vegas attorney indicated that he always accepted policy limits from docs, never going after them personally. I know that many insurance companies won't cough up limits in very good cases though. I am not a proponent of tort reform, but the situation in Las Vegas looks bad. I am not sure of what will happen or what should be done.


Also interesting are the communists in the article who think doctors can be enslaved. They cite the Hippocratic Oath as a means to force doctors to treat people for a price others dictate. Telling doctors they can't go on "strike"? In this regard, I am on the docs' side completely. The doctor who said he was a private practitioner and had a right to look out for his family is totally correct. The government getting involved in medical care was the first step down the road to totally collectivized medicine which will necessarily be worse than non-collectivized medicine. Bad situation on all fronts.

disclosure..i am a physician..


i remember a post where hdpm essentially stated that only very negligent , obviously terrible medical cases were actually won or settled....


i disagree...


how can every doctor who applies to work in lv trauma center be forced to pay such high malpractice fees...


it seems like either only terrible doctors apply for these jobs or perhaps, those outcomes ,which cause high settlements of actual court judgements, are actually the standard of care....


in my opinion, there are several key components to negligence trials....both medical and scalding hot coffee settlements...


a. something terrible has to happen


b. then , after the fact, anyone having anything possibly to do with this terrible event, wiil be considered for blame, with the qualifyer of having big bucks...(read insurance or assets or reputation here..)


c. then a case is manufactured against the blamed parties...


1. in medicine, this generally means hiring a california doctor to come in and state that what the treating physician did was outside common practice and was at least proximate cause...once that happens, then a jury of non-experts will determine the fate of a professional with 10-15 years of schooling , training,cme's etc....how are they possibly going to make an accurate judgement; when there is honest disagreement in many medical fields; even among academic experts...


i. the plot thickens: well a dr. did testify that it was malpractice.....how can that be when maybe only 5% of m.d.'s in the field might agree with this m.d.??? well, he has the right to his opinion and since the law is a fight between two parties, it is expected and ethical, for the forensic physician "to make the case"...and believe me they do....now, if a particular m.d. gets a reputation for "winning cases"; then he will be in high demand for fees which average 10 times the treating physician's fee....hey in a small state, it is very commomn for an opinion to be asked of this killer "expert"...another fat fee, JUST TO Keep him from being used by the opposition...oh yes this is true..


there is such a thing as malpractice, and perhaps m.d.'s are to blame for not policing themselves better, but anyone who thinks the tort system against physicians is fair, or contributes to better medicine actually being practiced...has their head up their ass,,,imho..


gl

The expert battle definitely cuts both ways. Insurance companies hire horrible experts to render opinions. Some will testify to absolutely ridiculous stuff. Some will examine someone for 10 minutes and come up with a bizarre theory. Jurors will often bite off. Both witnesses are experts, right? I know doctors are very afraid of malpractice verdicts, but I know a lot of good lawyers who are very scared of malpractice verdicts too. They wish they were easy to win or get settlements.


Also, it is often hard to get local docs to testify against another doc, even if they think the level of care was totally inadequate. So you have to get somebody from out of town at great expense.


The problem is a complex one. No easy answers. But I think both medical and legal malpractice are pretty typical. Lawyers get to save their mistakes more often though with after the fact begging to courts.

perhaps teating everyone equal as they do in new zealand for insatnce. an arm or leg lost is the same no matter who you are. then at least the awards are spelled out and people can get on with their lives without living in fear of the lawsuit. it does amaze me that the juries give out so much considering that they must realize that their own costs of living are being threatend by what they are doing.

Treating everybody equally is often the greatest injustice.

At least in terms of care recvd. Estimates are that the sytem will be broke in 2-3 years. Plus, middle-class[and up] workin' folk pay much much more propor'ly than they do here.


This, from a cousin o' mine that lives there.


Link wasn't working, BTW.