Are you worried about lawsuits?

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

MedChic

Senior Member
15+ Year Member
Joined
Dec 20, 2005
Messages
429
Reaction score
10
So this is going to sound silly but I was at a family party and my uncle was asking me about med school. My 10 yr old cousin comes over and states point blank "I would never be a doctor. Doctors get sued for like millions of dollars." Ok, yes granted this is a 10 year old and I should not be influenced by a person who's not even 5 feet tall yet, however it got me thinking....
I feel like medicine is what I have always wanted to do. However, with all the negatives I've been hearing about the healthcare system, lawsuits, insurance problems, doctors not making enough money etc. etc. I'm starting to wonder if I want to go into a profession with all these headaches.
I mean in what other job do people worry about being sued on a daily basis?
Are you guys thinking that far ahead?

Members don't see this ad.
 
It's pretty hard to get sued in Canada. You'd actually have to do something outrageous, not just hold a patient's hand or ask him how he's feeling, which seems to be all it takes to sue in the US. :laugh: The government absorbs a huge fraction of the malpractice insurance cost (highest cost, for an ob-gyn, is only about 25K a year), and it's in their best interest to deter frivolous lawsuits.
 
So this is going to sound silly but I was at a family party and my uncle was asking me about med school. My 10 yr old cousin comes over and states point blank "I would never be a doctor. Doctors get sued for like millions of dollars." Ok, yes granted this is a 10 year old and I should not be influenced by a person who's not even 5 feet tall yet, however it got me thinking....
I feel like medicine is what I have always wanted to do. However, with all the negatives I've been hearing about the healthcare system, lawsuits, insurance problems, doctors not making enough money etc. etc. I'm starting to wonder if I want to go into a profession with all these headaches.
I mean in what other job do people worry about being sued on a daily basis?
Are you guys thinking that far ahead?

It's a concern, but a very remote one at this point. We'll be paying thousands in malpractice insurance to cover ourselves if it does happen. If anything, it's another factor that motivates me to become a better physician.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
I am not a doctor, but If I was one, I wouldn't worry about lawsuits as much as to "why" Im being suied.
 
i have enough confidence in my skills to avoid the situation - and if it happens, sell the benz and get a good lawyer
 
yes, but u guys dont make as much as the US counterparts :smuggrin:
There was some research done on this, the take-home pay is on the same level as for US docs (like 15% difference, which can be also in the higher direction). So not really. I think neurosurgery is the only specialty which is a significantly crappier place to be in Canada than in the US. The salary caps (although it's still high), but the hours are just as brutal. And for docs who can bill for non-insurable procedures (like derms), it's definitely on the same scale. There are ophthalmologists in Canada making 2.5 million. The salary and billing data is available if you are willing to search on Google a bit.
 
Stay away from high risk specialties like General Surgery and Emergency Medicine. The worst, as most know, is OB/GYN. Pretty easy to stay away from if you are guy since they are pretty much being forced out it.
 
The worst, as most know, is OB/GYN. Pretty easy to stay away from if you are guy since they are pretty much being forced out it.

The current situation is actually the opposite. There is a very significant push to get more men back into OB/GYN. Most programs don't want to be without sausage, so a reasonably qualified male applicant has excellent odds to match anywhere he wants. The job market is decent regardless of gender.
 
The current situation is actually the opposite. There is a very significant push to get more men back into OB/GYN. Most programs don't want to be without sausage, so a reasonably qualified male applicant has excellent odds to match anywhere he wants. The job market is decent regardless of gender.

Even though it may be easier for a male to get residency the rest doesn't seem good. I have heard of male medical students getting kicked out of the room regularly during their OB/GYN rotations. There have also been male OB/GYNs getting fired for lack of business because women generally prefer other women and flat out not getting hired for the same reason. There was even a med school dean that said male OB/GYN practices don't do well.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
The current situation is actually the opposite. There is a very significant push to get more men back into OB/GYN. Most programs don't want to be without sausage, so a reasonably qualified male applicant has excellent odds to match anywhere he wants. The job market is decent regardless of gender.
I've heard it's about 50% males in ob-gyn now, and I was quite surprised...I've changed a few, and all were females.
 
I just found out the dollar is equal to the Canadian dollar, what is going on?!?!:(
Your money's getting cheaper?:p :laugh:


I got a frantic e-mail from my credit card company a few days ago...I thought I had fraud on my account or something, but it was just a panicky note encouraging me to go shop across the border and at US online stores as much as possible.:laugh:

:rolleyes:
 
Even though it may be easier for a male to get residency the rest doesn't seem good. I have heard of male medical students getting kicked out of the room regularly during their OB/GYN rotations. There have also been male OB/GYNs getting fired for lack of business because women generally prefer other women and flat out not getting hired for the same reason. There was even a med school dean that said male OB/GYN practices don't do well.

Please bring something to the table besides anecdote.
 
Here we go:

Do women prefer care from female or male obstetrician-gynecologists? A study of patient gender preference

Johnson AM, Schnatz PF, Kelsey AM, Ohannessian CM.
Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA.
J Am Osteopath Assoc. 2005 Aug;105(8):369-79.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether men should be encouraged to enter the medical specialty of obstetrics and gynecology. METHODS: A self-administered survey was designed for and distributed to patients (N=264) in 13 obstetrics and gynecology waiting rooms in Connecticut. The survey was used to determine whether there were any patient preferences with regard to the gender of physicians providing obstetric and gynecologic care within this population. In addition, the rationale for any preferences was analyzed. RESULTS: The majority of patients (66.6%) had no gender bias when selecting an obstetrician-gynecologist, and an even larger majority (198, 80.8%) felt that physician gender does not influence quality of care. There was no statistical difference in patient satisfaction based on physician sex. Respondents self-reporting gender bias rarely selected obstetrician-gynecologists based solely on this factor and frequently choose physicians of the sex that was not their indicated preference, suggesting that several factors other than gender preference are more important in physician selection. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of women surveyed did not select their obstetrician-gynecologists based solely on physician gender. Although a small percentage of survey respondents did indicate a gender preference, it rarely influenced physician selection and was only a minor consideration when compared with other desirable physician attributes.
 
Rarely are anecdotes isolated incidents. Even your study says a sizable portion give preference to gender, I can tell you that preference is usually other women. Not to mention that it is a big contributor because gender is one of the few things you know about a new doctor.

All I am saying is any male who is thinking about OB/GYN should think long and hard while doing tons of research before taking the plunge.
 
Seriously, I love Canada, but part of it was because of the great exchange rate. That's part of why people love going to Canadian casinos, it was more luck for your buck.:smuggrin:

I don't think I have EVER seen this happen. It still hasn't hit me yet--->>> EQUAL!! It definitely hurts. :(

Canadians should be happy Bush is President.
 
Actually, I think they just pulled ahead of us.
Yup, the news said it's the highest CAD has been for 31 years.:eek:

The part that bothers me is that our prices are still the same as when CAD was worth 60 cents US.:sleep:I hate going into a bookstore and seeing prices like "12 USD, 18 CAD.":mad: LOL.
 
The timing on this sucks - I just got my new passport and was thinking about roadtripping up to Toronto (I haven't been there in nearly 20 years). Of course, now that $$$ --> $, this isn't as appealing.
 
The timing on this sucks - I just got my new passport and was thinking about roadtripping up to Toronto (I haven't been there in nearly 20 years). Of course, now that $$$ --> $, this isn't as appealing.
Americans need a passport to go up to Canada? I had no idea.

Canadians can still use their DL when driving to the States (not when flying/sailing, though).
 
I'm not sure what the deadline is, but eventually we will need it to cross back into the States. A driver's license used to suffice, but not anymore.
 
I'm not sure what the deadline is, but eventually we will need it to cross back into the States. A driver's license used to suffice, but not anymore.
Oh horror, you could end up being trapped in Canada!:eek:

:smuggrin:
 
I personally probably wouldn't mind, but I know there are others who post here that would. ;)
;) If you are suggesting that some wouldn't mind you being trapped in Canada, then yes, I guess you could be right.:D

Who the hell wants to go to Toronto, anyway...I spent 3 days in that hellhole once, and bolted the second I could. AB is where it's at.:cool:

62869019_55408bc0f1.jpg




old-man-river-alberta_7637.jpg




This pic is actually of where I live.:oops:
 
Great post-w***ing tonight, thanks, everyone! Night.:hardy:
 
Great post-w***ing tonight, thanks, everyone! Night.:hardy:

Calgary and Edmonton still gets cold. I like Vancouver (no snow) and Montreal (I love their underground malls!).
 
I mean in what other job do people worry about being sued on a daily basis?

Many. As a lawyer I carried pretty significant malpractice insurance. All other professions do as well. As does anyone working in construction, architecture, manufacturing, etc. This is a litigious society and anyone in a business where people or their wallets can be damaged/injured/killed is well advised to carry insurance, to spread the risk. Physicians do not have the monopoly on this.
 
Rarely are anecdotes isolated incidents. Even your study says a sizable portion give preference to gender, I can tell you that preference is usually other women. Not to mention that it is a big contributor because gender is one of the few things you know about a new doctor.

I have no doubt that gender preference exists, and that it usually favors women OB/GYNs (although not always). Be that as it may, however, extrapolating from a collection of second hand horror stories is an ill fated endeavour. It doesn't work in science and it simply won't work here. Again, if you can find some solid examples of males having a hard time making it as OB/GYNs because of their gender I would like to see them.
 
i have enough confidence in my skills to avoid the situation - and if it happens, sell the benz and get a good lawyer



You will find that it matters little whether you actually did anything wrong. No one cares how good a doctor you are. It's a lottery. They just want to see what they can get.
 
Many. As a lawyer I carried pretty significant malpractice insurance. All other professions do as well. As does anyone working in construction, architecture, manufacturing, etc. This is a litigious society and anyone in a business where people or their wallets can be damaged/injured/killed is well advised to carry insurance, to spread the risk. Physicians do not have the monopoly on this.

Haha finally someone answered directly without going off on a tangent about the value of Canadian money.
I guess I didn't look at it this way. It seems like physicians carry more of a personal responsibility b/c of societal stigma re. malpractice. I just found it really surprising that a 10 year old kid would already be looking at doctors this way.
 
Back in my last job, my department sponsored a summer medical internship. During one of the morning classes, we had one of the doctors in our group (a gynecologic oncologist, btw) give a talk about the rising cost of malpractice insurance, and how it's starting to force doctors out of some states (I think the worst case was in Florida). She also talked about how it doesn't matter how much responsibility you had with a patient, that all they need to name you as a defendant is the fact that you signed an order once (perhaps while covering for another doc). Though you would likely get dropped if you only had a single order to tie you to the patient, she said it can take up to a year before that happened (in the meantime, you're losing earnings as you take time to prepare to defend the case).

I wasn't worried about being sued before sitting in on that lecture, but it definitely gave me some food for thought.
 
Canadians can still use their DL when driving to the States (not when flying/sailing, though).

I think we're going to need our passports as of next year, though. But for now, my driver's license (and my CC) is all I need to hit up the amazing outlet malls south of the border :D
 
You will find that it matters little whether you actually did anything wrong. No one cares how good a doctor you are. It's a lottery. They just want to see what they can get.

QFT.

And it often matters more whether or not they like you, not whether you are competent. Physicians can miss an early cancer while it is still treatable, but if the patient thinks his physician was really concerned and "did all he could" then a lawsuit is less likely. Make the patient feel like you don't really care, however, and he'll sue you for not spotting his lung cancer on a chest X-ray you evaluated ten years ago when it was nothing more than an imperceptable smudge.
 
Many. As a lawyer I carried pretty significant malpractice insurance. All other professions do as well. As does anyone working in construction, architecture, manufacturing, etc. This is a litigious society and anyone in a business where people or their wallets can be damaged/injured/killed is well advised to carry insurance, to spread the risk. Physicians do not have the monopoly on this.

I thought you worked in a big firm?
 
QFT.

And it often matters more whether or not they like you, not whether you are competent. Physicians can miss an early cancer while it is still treatable, but if the patient thinks his physician was really concerned and "did all he could" then a lawsuit is less likely. Make the patient feel like you don't really care, however, and he'll sue you for not spotting his lung cancer on a chest X-ray you evaluated ten years ago when it was nothing more than an imperceptible smudge.

Well, it's not so much whether the patient likes you. They may like you, but want more money, too. Then they sue. The trial "of your peers" will all depend on whether the jury likes you however. That will be the single deciding factor, nothing medically relevant will matter. Your experts will cancel out their experts (who they hired to say whatever they want). Such is our judicial system.

Really doctors should not be allowed to be paid to be expert witnesses without repercussions for giving false testimony. That would go a long way to solve the problem. And tort reform. Lots of tort reform.
 
I thought you worked in a big firm?

Your point? Bigger firms carry bigger policies. The more zeros in the size of deals you work on, the greater the liability. Every attorney working on those deals has to be covered, as anyone can be negligent, named in a suit and cause liability for the firm and its carrier.
 
I have no doubt that gender preference exists, and that it usually favors women OB/GYNs (although not always). Be that as it may, however, extrapolating from a collection of second hand horror stories is an ill fated endeavour. It doesn't work in science and it simply won't work here. Again, if you can find some solid examples of males having a hard time making it as OB/GYNs because of their gender I would like to see them.

Fair enough.

http://www.medicinenet.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=51277

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpa...1C0A9679C8B63&sec=health&spon=&pagewanted=all

http://www.nwanews.com/adg/Business/202527/

You won't see this as headlining story anywhere since discrimination against men is seen as politically correct. But this adequately shows what is going on.
 
Be careful - there's a lot of misinformation in this thread!

Browse through the General Residency forum for more information on malpractice suits and tort reform.
 
Your point? Bigger firms carry bigger policies. The more zeros in the size of deals you work on, the greater the liability. Every attorney working on those deals has to be covered, as anyone can be negligent, named in a suit and cause liability for the firm and its carrier.

It just sounded like you purchased your own policy.

Im actually not that familiar with firm malpractice insurance. How much does biglaw malpractice insurance go for (per associate, or whatever)?
 
Chuckwalla said:
You won't see this as headlining story anywhere since discrimination against men is seen as politically correct. But this adequately shows what is going on.

I'm glad you found some examples, even though the first two are 6-7 years old and reference the same individuals. As I said earlier, I have no doubt that there is some bias in OB/GYN, and this is reflected in a rare clinic's decision to go all female. In contrast to your original statement, however, it does not illustrate any systematic or even significant "forcing of men from the field." With the influx of women into medicine from 1980 onward, OB/GYN swung from being male dominated to female dominated, and if anything the pendulum is currently trying to swing back to some middle ground.

I found these two quotes from your articles illuminating:

And at least one other hospital in the state has offered an all-female OB-GYN staff.

In Fort Smith, Sparks Health System’s three-person OB-GYN staff became all-female in 2002 as a result of male doctors taking other assignments. However, a male OB-GYN will join the hospital staff in October, hospital spokesman Greg Russell said.

“What might be workable in a larger market is not necessarily workable in a market the size of Fort Smith,” he said.

Perhaps this is the trend you've picked up on, where certain practices in large markets opt to offer an all female staff in order to appeal to those patients with strong female gender preference. Here is another one:

Erin Tracy, MD, who chairs the junior fellows advisory council of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, says she frequently urges male medical students to become ob-gyns, often to no avail.

"I hear a lot of anecdotal reports from male medical students that they've had teachers or advisors tell them this is not a good field for men," Tracy says. "The reality is that while sometimes a patient does prefer a female provider, many just want the best. My male partners are just as busy as I am."

This underscores a conclusion from another paper regarding gender preference* in OB/GYN: "Gender of provider was about as important as a physician's experience in choice of clinician." Ergo, worrying that you'll be forced from the field based on gender is about as meaningful as worrying that you'll be forced out based on lack of experience.

* J Womens Health Gend Based Med. 2002 Mar;11(2):175-80
 
Top