again, ask any doctor whether the cost of malpractice insurance contributes to the cost of health care. then ask whether the cost of malpractice insurance is related to frivolous law suits. then ask whether unnecessary tests, which cost money, are often ordered due to concerns about a potential lawsuit.
i deal w/ atty's every day. in this case, i happen to have some personal insight into how the medical profession views the legal profession.
Well, but there are already limits on where a suit can be brought. And caps on damages - well, if a doctor screws up on a baby and creates a lifetime of medical bills that exceeds your cap, doesn't that seem wrong? "You're out of luck; your botched surgery occurred when you were too young, so you're on the hook for all your expenses after you turn 25."
I have no doubt that malpractice insurance ads to the cost of health care but tort reform, at least what was implemented in Texas, didn't lower the cost of health care. On the subject I will point out how ironic it is about people arguing about liberty when at the same time they want to put checks on one of the most effective way for individuals to address wrongs, lawsuits.
So do I and the cost of health care has not fallen in Texas since tort reform was passed in 2003. I have a doctor friend in Dallas and his premiums continue to rise for malpractice coverage even though medical malpractice is almost dead in Texas. The correlation of the high cost of health care and malpractice suits is a myth.
i don't know how it was implemented in texas, but to say it didn't work here, therefor it can't work elsewhere, is not correct.
I'll regret this, but you actually seem marginally engaged with the topic, basso, so I'll tell you what I think. "Tort reform" is a chimera. It was instituted in Texas after being called the "savior" of the state's medical system. Prices would drop for malpractice insurance, costs for patients would stop increasing and everyone, except a large chunk of the legal profession, would be happy. To the best of my knowledge, none of that has happened. Yes, several plantiffs have recieved less than they probably should have received, but all that helped was the insurance industry's bottom line. What drives the cry for "tort reform?" The insurance industry and their contributions to politicians, from both parties. edit: Lonestar28 just said much the same thing.
it's the correlation between the high costs of malpractice insurance, and the cost of health care. and, the cost of malpractice insurance is driving many doctors out of the profession, particularly OBGYNs.
Agreed. I have a loved one that was denied her day in court by tort reform. The only thing tort reform helps is the carrier's bottom line.
If doctors don't like the rates the government offers, they can decline to accept the public plan patients. Problem solved.
what can i tell you, my dad was a dr., my mom is, my step-mom too, and my older sister. my brother is a lawyer, and both sisters-in-law as well. none of them needs the insurance companies to tell them where they stand on the issue.
What I can tell you is that the carriers always pony up the cash to get tort reform passed. Cash in the form of contributions to politicians, ads, etc... They aren't above paying a representative's homeowners claim in record time to get their way either. Call Joe Nixon's office he can tell you that.
True but do you have other evidence where it has been implemented and health care cost have gone down?
I can understand why that would color your thoughts about the subject. Sadly, when I use personal anecdotes to support my take on various issues, few from your side of the aisle seem to take them seriously (and plenty from mine, probably!). Yet I know several Republicans appalled with the direction of the GOP. I've had several tell me it's been captured by the far-right wing of their party. That they are appalled by the rhetoric and tactics used by that wing of their party and by the gullible who listen. All true, yet I don't have a link. Do you buy it?
