Comments on legalsmeegal: TORT REFORM AND COTTON CANDY

Many of us have always believed that greed is one ...

2009-10-10T11:40:58.001-04:00

Many of us have always believed that greed is one of the factors that make our healthcare system the most expensive in the world.. Government has a place in keeping businesses…lawyers, drug companies, doctors, insurance companies…from making excessive profits off of people who can least afford it.

Even Republicans are starting to get behind the concept that government intervention on behalf of consumers is not only necessary…it is also good.

If we can put arbitrary caps on jury awards, we can put those same caps on the profits that drug companies, hospitals, doctors and insurance companies make.

Tort reform in itself will only save our 2 trillion dollar a year healthcare system about 0.5%

In itself...not a significant amount. But if you take the concept further and start putting caps not only on lawyers, but doctors, hospitals , insurance companies and drug companies...now you are talking real savings.

Government limits to jury awards. Yes.
Government limits to doctors fees. Yes
Government limits to drug companies profits. Yes
Government limits to insurance companies profits. Yes

Now we are all talking the same language

I agree that at present the vast majority of victi...

2009-10-09T13:34:44.441-04:00

I agree that at present the vast majority of victims of negligent medical care cannot seek redress for the harm they have suffered in our court system. The reason for that is the cost involved in pursuing those claims and the huge costs involved are ones caused by the defense, not the plaintiffs who, unlike defense, have no interest in making medical malpractice litigation more expensive.
As to the current system being unfair, at least in States such as Maryland and Virginia which have already enacted “tort reform” measures, I confess the only real unfairness I see is unfairness to the injured patient---not the negligent doctor. A specific example of what you are referring to here would help.
I did check out the website that you referenced. The case discussed was a woman who developed gangrene and had to have her right forearm amputated because “(a) physician’s assistant injected … medication improperly into her arm.” Sounds like medical negligence to me regardless of the drug manufacturer’s degree of responsibility.
Your comment was one of the reasons I again returned in my most recent blog to the “defensive medicine” excuse doctors give for ordering unnecessary tests—an excuse I call the “devil made me do it” defense. So see my new blog for a discussion of that issue.

I acknowledge that tort reform serves the insuranc...

2009-09-27T10:45:33.773-04:00

I acknowledge that tort reform serves the insurance companies' interests, but it also rememdies an unfair system against the medical profession. It acts as a sieve, not a filter. It results in billions of dollars of defensive medicine. It does not reach the majority of patients who have been victims of negligent medical care. See www.MDWhistleblower.blogspot.com under Legal Quality. My father prosecuted physicans. I know the legal arguments in favor the status quo well. I just don't buy them.