Cheney Lies About Medical Malpractice Claims Impact On Health Care Costs

[Robbien]

That is the title of the news release, really.

Cheney Lies About Medical Malpractice Claims Impact On Health Care Costs, Says Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights

7/20/2004 4:03:00 PM

To: National Desk

Contact: Jamie Court of The Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights, 310-392-0522, ext. 327

WASHINGTON, July 20 /U.S. Newswire/ -- The Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights today said Vice President Dick Cheney is lying to the American public by claiming that capping what juries can give to innocent victims of medical malpractice will lower health insurance premiums.

"America spends more on dog and cat food each year than all medical malpractice payouts combined," said FTCR president Jamie Court, author of Corporateering: How Corporate Power Steals Your Personal Freedom And What You Can Do About It (Tarcher/Penguin) "Malpractice costs are a fraction of 1 percent of all health-care costs. By contrast, prescription drugs are 16 percent of health costs. If Mr. Cheney and the Bush Administration wanted to lower health care costs, they would have permitted the government to bulk purchase prescription drugs for Medicare recipients. Limiting what innocent victims collect from wrongdoers cannot have an impact on health care premiums. Only curbing the greed of the insurance and pharmaceutical industries can make a real difference, but those industries are among biggest campaign donors on the hill."

FTCR has dedicated a resource page to correcting myths about the medical malpractice crisis that can be viewed at http://www.consumerwatchdog.org/healthcare/medmal.php

http://releases.usnewswire.com/GetRelease.asp?id=159-07202004

[Bandit]

1. Whoop There it is.....

Cheney Lies.

[mtnester]

2. Ohio capped awards in the name of reduced malpractice..

insurance. Doctors bought into it, got behind it, and got screwed because IT NEVER HAPPENED! In central Ohio alone earlier this year, thousands of women lost their gynecologists because they had to stop practicing due to INCREASES in their malpractice insurance that put them (and their employees) OUT OF BUSINESS.

So what do Ohioans have now? Caps on awards, waiting lists (if you can get on as a new patient at all) for physicians, and doctors paying more for their insurance.

IT DOES NOT WORK! Got that? I-T D-O-E-S N-O-T W-O-R-K

[mom cat]

It works for the greedy insurance companies and the politicians

that they own. :wtf:

[mtnester]

4. You got that right..eom

[Ilsa]

11. We capped last year in Texas.

I haven't heard that malpractice insurance rates have gone down. I bet the insurance companies are applying for increases, though.

[Tandalayo_Scheisskopf]

12. I read a news report...

That <gasp> a repuke politician down their got all up in a lather on the floor of one of the legislative houses because after the cap passed, medical rates went up and reports showed that Insurance Companies were taking profits at near-record rates.

What a shock. :eyes:

[Snellius]

3. Don't know about Americans, but I spend a lot on cat and dog food

I would guess that Americans probably spend more on cat and dog food than they do to help feed those who go hungry every night right here at home.

[NashVegas]

5. Malpractice Insurance

I know a doctor who pays out 25% of his annual salary for malpractice premiums. He gets about three claims filed against him per year. None have ever been successful.

We aren't the only ones getting screwed by insurance companies.

[Thor_MN]

6. None were successful... Except for the law firms....

They got paid, one way or the other.

[gratuitous]

7. The defense firms get paid one way or the other, that is

When the plaintiff's firm loses, it's out not only its anticipated fee, but also in all likelihood its costs. In a medical malpractice suit, costs can easily run to six figures because doctors are reluctant to testify against their local colleagues, so to secure the expert testimony of a competent doctor, a plaintiff's lawyer has to cast pretty far afield and those opinions don't come cheap.

They also don't come with a guarantee. If your expert doctor reviews the records, interview the claimant, and decides that there was no negligence, his bill still gets generated and it has to be paid by someone. The claimant is not ordinarily in any position to pay for it, so that expense falls to his attorney.

But wait, there's more! In addition to getting the honor of fronting costs, the plaintiff's attorney also has to pay taxes on those costs advanced, because they're a business receivable. If the case doesn't go to trial for a year or two, that $5,000 expert opinion gets taxed each year, and I don't know of any firm that bills its clients for these expenses.

In addition to the hundreds of hours spent working up the case, the law firm also has to turn away other business. If the case isn't successful, the firm is out not only the fee for the claim, but also any fees it could have earned from other cases. So there are several very good reasons (difficulty finding an expert to testify against a doctor, the expense of bringing a case to trial, the uncertainty of winning in any event, and the loss of potential other income) why lawyers are reluctant to bring a medical malpractice suit at all.

There have to be high, provable damages; clear liability; and an expert available who can testify to his colleague's negligence or incompetence -- that combination just doesn't come along very often.

[Hamlette]

9. thank you gratuitous

for explaining the problems of the plaintiff's bar. The cases are very expensive to litigate, a lawyer does not bring a case against a doctor unless the its an odds on favorite to win.

I've heard the myths about the costs of malpractice insurance for years. I've also heard that the average cost of malpractice is 10K a year. That's a lot of money but not more than health insurance costs for your family.

[juajen]

10. Excuse me, if the lawsuit was unsuccessful,

the lawyer did not get paid at all. As a matter of fact, he would have had to pay all expenses of bringing the lawsuit himself, out of his own pocket. Plaintiff lawyers are not paid by the hour; however, defense lawyers are. That makes you partially correct; however, most insurance companies have lawyers on retainer, so they don't get rich either. Most lawyers look long and hard at a medical malpractice lawsuit before agreeing to take it. Rarely are they so-called "frivilous" lawsuits. Don't buy into the "Rich Trial Lawyer" myth. Of course there are some very successful trial lawyers. The greater percentage, however, work hard for modest to moderate rewards.

[kayleybeth]

8. There is an EXCELLENT book on the MedMal issue

which I highly recommend. Based on a true story. (If you live in Connecticut you might remember the Sabia case-- apparently it was big news at the time). This book is nothing less than heartrending and it dispels many of the myths and lies the Republicans are spreading about the malpracice issue.

Damages: One Family's Legal Struggles in the World of Medicine by Barry Werth

Editorial Reviews

Amazon.com
On April 1, 1984, Donna Sabia went into labor expecting twins. But one of the babies arrived stillborn, while the other--Anthony Jr.--was barely alive, with an Apgar score (rating newborn vitality on a scale of 0 to 10) of 1. In the following years, he suffered from spastic quadriplegia, cerebral palsy, and cortical blindness, and would require lifelong medical attention costing millions of dollars just to survive. The Sabias' lawyers faulted Donna's maternity clinic and the delivering physician for her son's condition, initiating a 7-year lawsuit on the claim that a simple $40 ultrasound could have eliminated incalculable suffering and catastrophic expense.

Damages is a careful analysis of how the fields of law and medicine intersect in the realm of medical malpractice, where lawyers sue not only to redress suffering but to make sure that doctors and hospitals are more vigilant in the future, if only to avoid being sued again. Werth leads readers carefully through the litigation, from the deposing of expert witnesses, through the preparation for trial, to the posturing of settlement negotiations. Always firmly aware that lawyers sue doctors on behalf of human beings, however, he reveals the emotional and psychological consequences of a civil justice system that is often neither civil nor just. Werth explains esoteric legal and medical procedures in understandable terms that laypeople will not find condescending, while describing the human side of the Sabias' case without patronizing attorneys and physicians. Ultimately, Damages is the chronicle of a devoted family braving a medical malpractice industry in which the decision-making process on both sides is governed by a cost-benefit analysis that leads, perhaps inevitably, to the commodification of human life. "Even after a big verdict," Werth quotes one malpractice lawyer, "I'm suffering because all I could get my clients, who've been brutalized by the most appalling malpractice, was money." --Tim Hogan

more:

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0425168638/qid=1090364000/sr=ka-1/ref=pd_ka_1/102-9473820-3044906

[MasonJar]

13. Just tell me on which subject Dick has told the truth.