Psychiatry Malpractice Insurance

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.

PikminOC

MD Attending Physician
Removed
10+ Year Member
Joined
Sep 12, 2010
Messages
6,101
Reaction score
3,090
This may sound way out there, but people sue for so much money in medical malpractice cases that a psychiatrist's medical malpractice may not cover the judgement. Would it really be that ridiculous to practice without malpractice insurance? Is it legal? Some states have full time mp insurance at $20,000 per year anyway!

:xf:

Members don't see this ad.
 
You're a fool to practice without malpractice insurance, and in most states (if not all, it's not like I read it for every single state, just the ones I work in), you can't practice without it.

My malpractice was about $6000 last year but I will not continue it because I'm working full-time for a university that will now provide my malpractice insurance for me. It's also tax-deductible as a professional expense.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
Unless there is a law requiring liability insurance you have the option to go without. There are positives and negatives to this. If you go without insurance you should have it posted some place in your practice to let each patient know that you don't carry insurance.
 
Hmm, that could be disastrous, especially if you have a patient out to get you...and in this field where we deal with Axis II patients, that's not unrealistic.

I haven't been sued yet, but I've had 3 patients so far demand all their records via their lawyer--a hot signal that they were out to sue me. In fact I knew these patients were ticked off with me (because I wouldn't provide them with a drug of abuse and their previous psychiatrist gave them as much as they wanted, so I figure in their minds it was appropriate practice and I was the guy screwing up).

I figured what happened was their lawyer basically told them they had no case after they reviewed the records and decided not to sue.

Had i not had insurance I wouldn't have been able to have (edit-I put in "piece") peace of mind knowing that even if I won the case I could've spent tens of thousands in legal fees.

But as I mentioned in another thread, a buddy of mine is being sued and he didn't do anything wrong and so far the legal fees are in the 6 figure range, and lucky for him because he's faculty, the university is paying for all of it.

Another thing, and this happens in private practice, the first few months you practice you will get very troublesome patients because you have to open your hours to brand new patients. What usually happens after about 6 months to 1 year is all the patients you don't like will either stop going to you because they realize you're not going to give them Xanax up the wazoo or they just don't like your practice style, or you'll terminate them yourself because you can't tolerate their behavior (e.g. they start screaming in the office or the missed multiple appointments, or they accuse you of stealing their money because they already paid when in fact they haven't).

After oh so long, your patient load will stabilize to the point where you'll have plenty of patients that you've established a long-term, beneficial and trusting relationship and the new patients will be the minority. Until you get to this point, you're at greater risk for a malpractice suit. The biggest factor for a lawsuit isn't bad practice, it's pissing off a patient The pissy factor is much higher in the first year. Further, if you're new to the area, there are plenty of hospitals that will try to refer you patients that really aren't appropriate for outpatient treatment yet but they're willing to dump them onto you because their insurance stopped paying for inpatient treatment, and when you're just starting out you don't know who to trust, you have many open hours to fill out, you'll be more likely to take these dumps and only realize after the fact that you got a patient you can't handle.

My point is you pretty much should always have malpractice insurance whether or not you are forced to have it by the state's laws and if you do decide to take the risk and not have it, definitely do not do that until you at least prune out the patients that are higher risk and that can take several months.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
but I've had 3 patients so far demand all their records via their lawyer--a hot signal that they were out to sue me. In fact I knew these patients were ticked off with me (because I wouldn't provide them with a drug of abuse and their previous psychiatrist gave them as much as they wanted, so I figure in their minds it was appropriate practice and I was the guy screwing up).

Retaining counsel is not cheap, seems improbable to me that med-seekers would bother. But you're spot on, if three other psychiatrists in the community did it, then you are seemingly not practicing within the community standard of care -- ridiculous. Thank goodness for the "respectable minority."
 
Further, if you're new to the area, there are plenty of hospitals that will try to refer you patients that really aren't appropriate for outpatient treatment yet but they're willing to dump them onto you because their insurance stopped paying for inpatient treatment, and when you're just starting out you don't know who to trust, you have many open hours to fill out, you'll be more likely to take these dumps and only realize after the fact that you got a patient you can't handle.

What do you mean by "dumps" and "can't handle"? (again, honest question)
 
This may sound way out there, but people sue for so much money in medical malpractice cases that a psychiatrist's medical malpractice may not cover the judgement. Would it really be that ridiculous to practice without malpractice insurance? Is it legal? Some states have full time mp insurance at $20,000 per year anyway!
Let me ask you a question, GroverPsychMD:

This may sound way out there, but people who get hurt in car accidents without insurance can sue for so much money that it's far beyond what most folk's car insurance will cover. Also, I've had a driver's license for almost 25 years and have never been in an accident. Would it be ridiculous to be a daily commuter without car insurance in this day and age?

Penny for your thoughts...
 
I believe car insurance in required but malpractice insurance may not be depending on the state, so there is a choice in terms of legality. Plus, car insurance is much more affordable to me. My state has no malpractice tort reform so premiums are high and the state is considered a litigious state.
 
seems improbable to me that med-seekers would bother.

All 3 were Suboxone patients where the previous doctor left the practice and I took over....

And guess what? She gave them dosages way more than the manufacturer recommended, also gave them benzos, a contraindication from the manufacturer, and she let a lot of them go without paying.

So here I come in and tell them that I cannot continue this type of practice....To some of these patients, I pushed them out of their comfort zone. Further, and if you've given out Suboxone you'll know what I'm talking about, many Suboxone patients are problematic and need to be terminated if violating their patient treatment contracts. The previous doctor allowed her patients to violate the contract again and again and again. So for these patients to get a new doctor, me, telling them if they ever pull this bull$hit on me, they're outta here, well let's just say I pissed them off.

Of course I brought all of this up diplomatically, and I brought literature showing then I wasn't making this up, but to them just the mere suggestion that they were going to be taken off of 32 mg a day of Suboxone (manufacturer's maximum recommended dose is 16 mg, but they say you can go up to 24 mg on only rare occasions), and even at a slow rate, well let's just say some of them started screaming in the office. One lady, after I told her to calm down, trying diplomatically for the first few minutes, then after that just telling her something to the effect if she didn't calm down I'd have security drag her out or have her sent to the ER......And no she wasn't screaming out of anxiety, she was threatening me to give her Suboxone at inappropriate dosages or "you'll be sorry"

She was one of the 3 where I got the lawyer's papers a few days later. I'm sure her lawyer would've had a hell of a time trying to successfully sue me when my patient was angry at me for recommending we actually follow the manufacturer's recommended guidelines.

This was a very frustrating situation for me because out of the 30 patients this previous doctor had, about 10 of them had dosages over the manufacturer's maximum recommendation, several of them were also put on benzos, and she continued to give Suboxone to a few patients even found to be engaging in criminal activities. Had she still been with the university, I think I would've gone up to her and told her, "Umm lady, what the EFF were you thinking?!?!?"
 
Last edited:
What do you mean by "dumps" and "can't handle"? (again, honest question)

Read the House of God and you'll know what I'm talking about.

If a patient has private insurance, within a few days of hospitalization, the insurance company will often-times pull the plug on payment. They'll argue the patient shouldn't be in the hospital because the psychiatrist is not doing much. Of course in some cases the psychiatrist isn't doing much, but in other cases the psychiatrist can't do more and the patient is not safe enough for discharge.

Just to given an example, if a patient is severely depressed, if you start a patient on an SSRI, they usually don't work for weeks, and you can't go up on dosages daily. For most SSRIs, you start on a dose you aren't supposed to increase it for about 1 week.

Okay so it's 4 days later and now the insurance company doesn't want to pay anymore because you're not changing the meds.

Yes I know...it doesn't make sense.

But several hospitals and their doctors want to dump patients that really are not yet appropriate for discharge, e.g. they may still be suicidal or homicidal, to the outpatient office, and then if the patient commits suicide, they try to pull an argument that they weren't the last person who "touched" the patient. A large part of it is because the insurance company will no longer pay, so the hospital is now losing money on that patient.

E.g. a social worker will refer the patient to the office, telling the office the patient is actually doing well, then when the patient is seen in the office they tell you they are still suicidal and they've only been in the hospital for 2 days, and the doctor only spent a total of about 30 minutes with the patient total.

So you then tell the patient to go back to the hospital, the patient refuses saying they were treated terribly there, and you call the police, the patient is brought back to the hospital, then the ER discharges the patient, now the patient is screaming at you to get them better and they're more than you can handle and they really need to be in the hospital treated with REAL care, not some schmuck just giving them an SSRI and discharging them 24 hours later.

And in case you didn't know I've had 2 suicides. One of which was a patient that fit the above, I decided from there on we wouldn't ever take a referral from that specific hospital again. And for those of you savvy psychiatrists that know there's patients that are chronically suicidal but never really actually do it that really should be discharged, no she wasn't one of them. This patient really was dangerous, and I sensed it from the beginning. Anyone who's been suicidal since the age of eight years with no history of abuse, borderline sx, no drug abuse, who denies she's suicidal to me, then after she leaves my office and in the waiting area I hear her telling her mother to stop worrying about her because after a few months she'll be over it with her future suicide, telling her she's thought about it long and hard that she really wants to kill herself and the only thing hold her back is she knows it'll sadden her parents but their sadness will only be for a few months while her depression has existed her entire life, even as a child...etc, and again no borderline sx...just pure depression.

This was one of the few times ever I had a suicidal patient where I sensed she really wanted to do it and do it soon, and believe me, I've discharged borderline patients telling me they'll kill themselves if I discharged them only to see them again and again in the psych emergency center. No this one was different. She committed suicide within 5 days of me seeing her. Personally if I was the inpatient doctor I wouldn't have discharged her unless I was confident she was better and if I wasn't I would've transferred her to long-term care.

And while she was the straw that broke the camels back, I had about a dozen patients that came from this hospital and with the exception of one, all of them told me the doctor would insult them, tell them they were losers, or even things to the affect of "your'e so much of a loser you couldn't even kill yourself." As I've said before, if one patient tells me, I don't believe it. If several tell me and these people don't know each other, I'm thinking there probably is something to it. Then on top of that a colleague of mine worked at that specific hospital for a month and then resigned telling me all the stuff my patients were telling me was true and she couldn't tolerate working with this guy that she described as a monster.

Getting back to my original point, when you're new to an area you don't know who the good sources are for referrals. I'd have my guard up and have the insurance just in case.
 
Last edited:
Getting back to my original point, when you're new to an area you don't know who the good sources are for referrals. I'd have my guard up and have the insurance just in case.

I just had a thought (you can hear my wife rolling her eyes at me):

I know several group homes that won't accept a referral from the hospital until speaking with the client, at least by phone.
Suppose PP Psych's did the same thing?

Couldn't you say, "Oh, yes. I do have space in my schedule and I really appreciate the referral. In fact, I could probably get him in to the office within just 2-3 business days for you guys, because I so appreciate your referrals, and I want to be responsive to the needs of the patients and the needs of the hospital.
So please put the patient on the phone and let me talk with him for 5 or 6 minutes so we can both gauge whether my practice will meet his needs?"

It won't solve everything, but it will prevent the hospital from flat out lying about the nature of the referral. You could even lay out some ground rules (like "2 dirty drug screens within 6 months and you're toast," or "I will be tapering off the BZD's within 2 months, so if you won't agree to that, I think you need someone else.").

Quick story: (in other words, stop reading now)
Last month I got a referral from an ICU to our psych hosp of a pt (well known to me) who OD'd a week ago, and all faxed MD and Nsg notes say she has denied SI ever since, but the PP Psychiatrist consulting wrote today "pt still suicidal, must go to county psych hosp." The PATIENT called me on the phone (from her ICU bed) at the psych ER ('yep, she knows the number by heart) b/c she wanted to "hurry up this transfer so you can send me home, so I can smoke." She confirmed that she has not had any SI since she woke up hrs after arrival and feels terrible that she scared so many people. She even had an appt already scheduled with her clinic psychiatrist late that same day, if she can get out soon enough to get there (literally 4 blocks walking distance from her current hosp bed). She was in the ICU all this time only b/c that is the only place that particular hospital will permit pt's to have a "sitter." When I called the consultant, he said that she had indeed been denying SI for a week and seemed in perfectly good spirits, but "unless you're a mind reader, she needs a psychiatric evaluation." When I asked on what grounds we would be placing her on a psych hold for something she did last week, with no SI/HI/psychosis since, he said, "well you can make that determination to accept that liability, but I won't."
It was clear that he lied in his note that she is "still suicidal."
I told him that there is no reason for the referral because she has no apparent need for inpatient psychiatry admit today and there is nothing we could do for her today that he could not have done in the last week, so he can either let her go to her outpt appt today, or see her in his office at his convenience, or send her to the private psych hospital where he has privileges.
 
Just to given an example, if a patient is severely depressed, if you start a patient on an SSRI, they usually don't work for weeks, and you can't go up on dosages daily. For most SSRIs, you start on a dose you aren't supposed to increase it for about 1 week.

Okay so it's 4 days later and now the insurance company doesn't want to pay anymore because you're not changing the meds.

Yes I know...it doesn't make sense.

Ugh. I had so many arguments with insurance companies over that one. It would inevitably go to doc-to-doc and I'd have a psychiatrist on the other line and I'd be like, "C'mon, you know how these meds work!" And most of them would still say, "I know, but I'm denying the days unless you change the meds around."

Though I actually did have one reviewed on a psychotic patient whom I admitted I didn't have much concrete on, but that something felt a bit off and I was trying to obtain more history and better assess his safety risk. That guy worked with me and gave me a day or two to figure things out. That was pretty rare though, which is probably why it stands out so much in my memory.
 
Ugh. I had so many arguments with insurance companies over that one. It would inevitably go to doc-to-doc and I'd have a psychiatrist on the other line and I'd be like, "C'mon, you know how these meds work!" And most of them would still say, "I know, but I'm denying the days unless you change the meds around."

Though I actually did have one reviewed on a psychotic patient whom I admitted I didn't have much concrete on, but that something felt a bit off and I was trying to obtain more history and better assess his safety risk. That guy worked with me and gave me a day or two to figure things out. That was pretty rare though, which is probably why it stands out so much in my memory.

So let me ask some of you who have been psychiatrists longer than me,
back when suicidal patients were kept inpatient for weeks (even after they stopped stating SI), was the risk of suicide in the weeks after discharge any lower?
Do we have any evidence that the lower length of stay (LOS) for such patients is actually any more harmful to patients?
 
I know several group homes that won't accept a referral from the hospital until speaking with the client, at least by phone.
Suppose PP Psych's did the same thing?

A good idea, but....

Once you talk to a patient, the doctor-patient relationship has already started.

My rock-solid idea for safe and lower maintenance patients is to have a practice with several mental health therapists who are not psychiatrists and let the therapists refer to you and tell them they are not allowed to refer to you nightmare train-wreck patients that cannot be handled in private practice psychiatry. If these therapists have half a brain, they'll know what you mean.

Nonpsychiatric mental health providers tend to have patients with higher GAFs and they know the patient well. If they are under the same roof they'll not want high-maintenance patients either, and the psychiatric patients tend to be more high maintenance than the patient who merely is having some excessive anxiety at work.

My advice, don't accept brand new patients ever that are direct discharges from hospitals in the private practice setting unless you know that hospital is reliable or you have a rock-solid filter system. The only time I've had consistently safe and reliable discharges were from a local private psychiatric facility in the area, the Lindner Center, and the doctor there would do a doctor-to-doctor or fax a report to me to make sure we were on the same page before they discharged the patient. Yes of course, some of the patient were still sick but they were never dump jobs where the patient could've killed themselves within hours to days.

One filter system I tried to use was-do not accept patients within 2 weeks of the discharge date and DO NOT accept a patient into the office the same day as the discharge from the hospital. If it's a same day office visit as the discharge, some hospitals will definitely play "Hot Potato" with you leaving you as the last loser that touched the train wreck so if the patient kills themself they can say it's all your fault. Yes I'm being sarcastic. Of course patients deserve more respect than this but I'm merely adding this to accentuate the poor nature by which they are being processed.

Even with the above filter-system I've encountered problems so I told the private practice office to stop taking from hospitals altogether except the Lindner Center. (And I am leaving that private practice anyway by the end of this month.)

Discharging from a psychiatric unit can often be like this..especially when insurance stops paying.
Play at 8:30 minutes, con man tries to take a woman home with him so she can become his wife...er cough cough, slave.

[YOUTUBE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fkP7KcWvVEY&feature=related[/YOUTUBE]
 
Last edited:
All 3 were Suboxone patients where the previous doctor left the practice and I took over....

....And no she wasn't screaming out of anxiety, she was threatening me to give her Suboxone at inappropriate dosages or "you'll be sorry"


Had she still been with the university, I think I would've gone up to her and told her, "Umm lady, what the EFF were you thinking?!?!?"

Wow, she probably left because she couldn't get the horses back in the barn...and feared for her life or malpractice...
 
Let's just say that quite a few people in the office weren't exactly happy with her. She was dumping urine in the sink people use to get drinking water.

I'm still mucking through the crap she's left for me. Within the first few weeks of taking her patients I terminated 3 of them, about 7 of them stopped seeing me on their own, and the ones so far that have managed to stay on are telling me they're surprised that I'm actually spending time talking to them, and not knowing why the previous doctor upped their Suboxone for ridiculous things such as insomnia. I figure in another 2-3 months I'll have it straightened out.

Of course, I could be wrong and maybe she was actually a genius for giving out more Suboxone for people to help them sleep, go above the manufacturer's maximum recommended dosage, mix it with meds that are contraindicated with Suboxone, yada yada yada.....

Drug dealers have plenty of Suboxone to sell on the street. I figure they had to get it somewhere.
 
Last edited:
Awesome clip whopper! :soexcited::soexcited::soexcited:

I thought when you first evaluate a patient you don't have to take them on as a patient and if you have this documented and signed by the patient this is acceptable.
 
Once you talk to a patient, the doctor-patient relationship has already started.

Our front desk lady writes a description of the patient's needs and complaints on intake forms. Sometimes I read these forms and I see all the red flags with utter dread. However, despite the number of red flags I see, sometimes they turn out to be completely manageable and enjoyable patients to work with. Other times their needs seem benign and they turn into complete nightmares. It's really hard to say if a patient will be appropriate for the level of care you can provide unless you've at least completed an intake evaluation. :(
 
Top