$58.6 million judgment against OB/GYN in CT

[medicalmatins]

---

Members do not see this ad.

http://blogs.courant.com/connecticut_insurance/2011/05/in-medical-malpractice-case-ju.html

Holy. Crap.

This is so upsetting and sort of frightening... I want to go into OB. How do I find out about malpractice caps and malpractice numbers in my state?

 

[Suncrusher]

A board certified OB for the plaintiff testified that it does. Which means he is lying and his medical license needs to be stripped.

The real villian here is the OB "experts" who testified for the plaintiff. Lawyer cant do **** without their testimony.

There will always be MD-degree-holding "expert" witnesses who are willing to testify against other doctors who are actually meeting the expected standard of care in order to collect the huge consult fees...

 

[oldbearprofessor]

NYS passed a recent law which allows people to go back and sue physicians/hospital for pain and suffering if they ever had a fetal death back to the 90s and its NOT based on malpractice.

Link please?

 

[oldbearprofessor]

This is so upsetting and sort of frightening... I want to go into OB. How do I find out about malpractice caps and malpractice numbers in my state?

You should be aware of a few things:

1. Malpractice caps are primarily for pain and suffering and have a much smaller effect on OB malpractice suits which are principally based on life-long care costs. There is some effect, but not as much as other fields.

2. Malpractice numbers by "state" are not as key as they are by district/county. These cases are tried in local courts, not state courts and there are huge variations in how juries see them within any single state.

3. This is a highly active area of political involvement. The states that are "good" now, can quickly be "bad" and vice-versa. Making decisions now is unlikely to be helpful in the long-term.

 

[medicalmatins]

You should be aware of a few things:

1. Malpractice caps are primarily for pain and suffering and have a much smaller effect on OB malpractice suits which are principally based on life-long care costs. There is some effect, but not as much as other fields.

2. Malpractice numbers by "state" are not as key as they are by district/county. These cases are tried in local courts, not state courts and there are huge variations in how juries see them within any single state.

3. This is a highly active area of political involvement. The states that are "good" now, can quickly be "bad" and vice-versa. Making decisions now is unlikely to be helpful in the long-term.

Thanks for this information. I have so much to learn.

 

[matt30]

It's absurd that we have juries deciding these cases. A "jury of your peers" is not fit to decide cases like these because they make decisions based on emotion and not on fact and accepted standards of care. An easy way to bring down healthcare costs is to stop having absurd jury malpractice trials and put it in the hands of an expert judge or expert panel of judges to determine whether there truly was negligence on the part of the physician.

To be fair, most states provide the option of a bench trial. Not only that, most of these awards can be (and in most cases are) reduced by a judge (under the doctine of remittitur) if the punishment is substantially disproportionate to the evidence presented.

 

[Pisiform]

Its sad that doctors spend their entire life learning and treating ill patients and do whatever they can in best of their judgement and one small outcome - which may be beyond their control - makes them lose their reputation and life-savings.

No wonder doctors think twice before accepting patients nowadays