Bush: $250,000 Cap Needed For Medical Malpractice Suits

CNSNEWS.com ^ | 1/16/03 | Christine Hall

[kattracks]

1st Add: Includes comments from Alliance of American Insurers)

(CNSNews.com) - President Bush on Thursday called for Congress to pass a law limiting non-economic, punitive damages in medical malpractice suits to $250,000.

"Our medical liability system is broken," the president told a Scranton, Pa. audience.

"A broken system like that first and foremost hurts the patients and the people of America," said Bush, because "junk lawsuits" drive up malpractice insurance premiums and drive innocent doctors out of town, according to the president.

Non-economic damages include jury awards for "pain and suffering," while punitive damages are imposed as a way of punishing a defendant. Defendants can be required to pay non-economic and punitive damages on top of damages for loss of pay, medical expenses and other costs connected to a plaintiff's injury.

\li30\sb30 President Bush's plan would cap recoveries for non-economic damages; reserve punitive damages for cases where they are justified; provide for payments of judgments over time rather than in a single, lump sum; ensure that old cases could not be brought years after an event; reduce the amount doctors must pay if a plaintiff has received other payments from an insurer to compensate for their losses; and would provide that defendants pay judgments in proportion to their fault.

In the American legal system, laws governing civil disputes are usually decided by state legislatures, but Bush said this time the federal government needs to intervene.

"It is a national problem that needs a national solution," said Bush, because the direct cost of malpractice insurance and defensive medicine raises health care costs paid by the federal government though Medicare, Medicaid, veterans' health care and health care afforded to government employees.

The House passed a medical malpractice bill last year but the measure stalled in the Senate. Bush acknowledged that the Senate remains the major stumbling block to reform and urged citizens to lobby their home state senators on the need for damage caps.

The insurance industry is pushing Congress to pass legislation this year.
Rodger S. Lawson, president of the Alliance of American Insurers, urged Congress to enact medical malpractice liability reforms to reduce the number and size of malpractice claims.

\li30\sb30 Lawson called the president's plan a "solid step forward for the American health care system and the American economy."

"Reforming the medical malpractice system is critical, because the rising costs of health care are borne by numerous insurance lines: workers' compensation, automobile, homeowners, etc. All lines share some of the escalating costs," Lawson said. More to Follow...

See Earlier Stories:

New Year No Fun For Pennsylvania Doctors

Study: Fear of Litigation Has 'Stunning Impact' on Doctors, Health Care

[Support Free Republic]

PLEASE SUPPORT FREE REPUBLIC

Donate Here By Secure Server

Or mail checks to
FreeRepublic , LLC
PO BOX 9771
FRESNO, CA 93794
or you can use
PayPal at Jimrob@psnw.com

Become A Monthly Donor
STOP BY AND BUMP THE FUNDRAISER THREAD

[Larry Lucido]

Allow me to speak for the "Bush is always wrong" crowd:

"Yea, he's right but he should have done this earlier. And he only did it because we (true conservatives) held his feet to the fire."

[MamaLucci]

You're good.
:)

[caisson71]

I was thinking of a sum totalling no more than $2,500. That would chase away most ambulance chasers.

[RJCogburn]

I've been critical of Bush domestically but he has impressed me quite a bit lately.....the tax cut package, the Michigan case, the malpractice issue. He is demonstrating strong and clear leadership. He makes some concessions but he has lately been doing pretty well.

I was not in the Bush is always wrong group, but admit to membership in the 'wrong alot' group.

I hope he keeps it up.

[Sacajaweau]

This shouldn't be necessary if we had responsible juries and judges in these cases (AND OTHERS). They are attorney driven.......and drive up the costs of our medical insurance and consequently effect us all.

[Chancellor Palpatine]

Your child's doctor comes to the operating suite while under the influence of prescription narcotics. Through ineptitude and while buzzed, he permanently paralyzes your child.

You find non-economic damages capped, and the ruination of lives, all so middle managers at the docs insurance company can get bigger annual bonuses and golf outings at nicer golf courses.

Is that justice?

[Coop]

Your child's doctor comes to the operating suite while under the influence of prescription narcotics. Through ineptitude and while buzzed, he permanently paralyzes your child.

You bring your sick/injured child to the emergency room, only to find the doors permanently shut because yet another hospital was closed due to outrageous malpractice awards chasing away doctors and bankrupting hospitals.

Is that justice?

[tom paine 2]

Economic damages will take care of the child for life. What is it that you are looking for. Life ain't fair, you just figuring that out?

[justshutupandtakeit]

That is neither justice nor an accurate description of the problem the medical section is facing. It is at best a straw man. And even in the extreme and unlikely scenario you posit there is no reason a lawyer should make millions because the insurance company (read everyone else) can pay it. Cap lawyers' fees from these cases too.

[Shermy]

Is that justice?

No, but the insurance companies get a great return on their relatively small campaign contribution investments.

It's a manufactured crisis, recently heated up not by any change of medical mistakes or law suits, but insurance company losses on the stock market. They phoneyed up some crisis, use the deflection technique by demonizing lawyers (not thier own, naturally), and predictably if limitations would come insurance rates would not fall.

[ampat]

Then you need to pass a law that says loser's lawyer pays, if the lawyer advertises like an ambulance chaser.

[The Irishman]

The scenario you describe is a miniscule percentage of the "malpractice" actions. It would certainly call for punitive damages, BTW, as well. A much more typical case is the child, whose doctor did everything he could, that suffers a serious result from illness or injury. The parents are solicited by an attorney. The parents are convinced to sue the doctor, "Since he won't pay anyway, the insurance company will. Nothing personal, you understand.". And the insurance company does settle because the cost of litigation exceeds the the amount of settlement. The attorney gets 30-50% of the settlement.

Bush is right on this one and I applaud him for it.

Regards.

[upchuck]

The other side of this is that the AMA needs to get much tougher on docs who are dangerous to their patients. There are way too many quack docs running around. License yanked in one state? No problem, move to another state and yer back in business. To counter this, a national database of "stupid doctor tricks" must be established. And this database needs to be online and publically available.

[luckystarmom]

Try having a child that has brain damage because of medical malpractice. What do you think of your $2500 cap?

I know I have a child with a medical malpractice potential suit. We can't even find a lawyer because they say it isn't worth it. After you pay the lawyers, there isn't much left.

It sucks, and my daughter is the one who is going to suffer. Everyone agrees that the doctors screwed up, but no one (except us) wants to help her. If insurance covers occupational therapy, speech therapy, phsysical therapy, it's limited. If the school cover occupational therapy or speech therapy, it's limited.

No one pays for tutors to help. No one is going to pay for her when she can't get a job.

It sucks!!!!!!!!!!!! Her doctor's were lazy. She was 6 weeks old, and all they had to do was put her in the hospital and run some tests. She was vomiting, and the nurse praticioner just sent us home with sugar water because they were out of pedialyte. This caused her electrolytes to get imbalanced, along with some other mistakes and she has permanent brain damage.

Some lawsuits are frivolous, and some aren't. An adult getting burned by hot coffee is frivolous. A baby getting brain damage from a lazy doctor is not.

[Redleg Duke]

But...but...but that would destroy the luxury car and boat industry! Granted the private aircraft industry would do much better with all of that additional disposible income that the doctors would have...but...but...but it isn't fair!

WAHHHH!

[luckystarmom]

NO, it's not. My daughter has brain damage because a doctor screwed up.

[Mamzelle]

If your child (let's just say he's a teenager with a brand new car that he's wrecked, and an empty sixpack in the backseat) heads to the operating suite of a West Virginia hospital, to find no surgeon left to work--is that justice? It's a surefire way to prevent malpractice, of course!

The lawyers stole all the golden eggs from the goose--now all that's left is to kill the goose. Whether a child suffers or not, the goose (the insurance system created by doctors to help patients) is dead.

[RJCogburn]

We can't even find a lawyer because they say it isn't worth it

If the sad case of your child is malpractice then there should be economic loss of a lifetime of at least average earnings which would be a whole lot of money and certainly enough for an attorney to take the case.

There must be more to the story if no attorney will take it.

Whatever the facts, I am sorry for you and your child.