cost of malpractice insurance etc???

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

Disgruntled One

Member
7+ Year Member
15+ Year Member
Joined
Jan 22, 2004
Messages
27
Reaction score
0
Ive seen lots of rankings of MD incomes, but how much is the malpractice insurance for each? im sure pediatricians dont have to pay as much as cardiologists (or do they). Any rankings of incomes after insurance etc. is subtracted?

im just curious. thanks

Members don't see this ad.
 
I have the rates for a county in Michigan for 2003, so just about outdated. I'll give a quick summary below. Highest is of course OB/GYN at about 90K a year with General surgery pretty close. IM, FP (no OB), and Radiology are all at around 35K a year. The lowest is non surgery Dermatology and PM&R at around 13K.
 
In S. Fla, family practice is about 35,000 and it varies from there. I know the neurosurgeons in the hospital I used to volunteer at went on strike basically and made themselves hopsital employees so that the hospital picked up the malpractice tab...it's rather high. I think the rates given for Michigan might be on the lower end...there are some places where some specialties have become very very expensive to practice in (over 100,000...). Depends on the place you want to pratice, and of course any cases against you, etc...
 
Members don't see this ad :)
From a recent WSJ article:



So Sue Me: Doctors Without Insurance

As Premiums Rise, Physicians
Drop Malpractice Coverage;
What It Means for Patients
By RACHEL EMMA SILVERMAN
Staff Reporter of THE WALL STREET JOURNAL


With medical malpractice insurance premiums climbing steeply, a growing number of physicians are taking a radical step: They're canceling their coverage altogether.

Going bare, as it is known, or "self-insuring," means that doctors, rather than insurance companies, are responsible for legal fees and any judgments or settlements if they're sued. For patients it means potentially less money if their doctor botches the job.

Many of the physicians going bare so far practice in Florida, which consistently has some of the highest malpractice insurance rates in the nation and is known for its activist doctors. More than 5% of Florida's roughly 47,700 active medical doctors don't have malpractice insurance coverage, up from 4% of doctors a year ago, according to the Florida Department of Health statistics. In Miami-Dade County, in South Florida, nearly 20% of the county's 6,360 active medical doctors are bare. The phenomenon is most common in high-risk specialties such as neurosurgery and obstetrics, but even primary-care physicians are forgoing insurance.

As premiums edge beyond the reach of physicians in other states, doctors elsewhere are studying, and in some cases adopting, the option. As a result, some in the medical profession expect the phenomenon to continue to spread.

Many of the doctors dropping malpractice insurance are sheltering assets in sophisticated trusts or partnerships, safely out of reach for legal judgments down the road. In Florida, doctors know that assets such as their homes and annuities are protected by state law from creditors, one reason why so many doctors in the state are accepting the risk of no coverage.

Nobody knows for sure how many doctors are bare nationwide. The American Medical Association has changed its policy to reflect the growing number of uninsured physicians, especially from Florida. In the past, the doctors' group recommended that physicians carry sufficient malpractice insurance to protect themselves and their patients. But in December 2002, AMA policy makers voted to cut the recommendation and leave the decision to doctors.

Mark Macumber, a family practitioner in Berwyn, Ill., dropped his coverage last spring, after his premium climbed to $40,000 from about $11,000 the year before. With $130,000 in medical-school loans and a big mortgage to pay, Dr. Macumber decided the coverage wasn't worth it. Without an insurance policy, he lost his hospital privileges and isn't part of an HMO network anymore. Instead, he started a low-cost health-care clinic that targets uninsured patients at $40 a visit.

When Dr. Macumber decided to go bare, he sent a letter to his patients letting them know. Most stuck with him. "It didn't change my opinion of him, nor did it change the way he practices medicine as far as I'm concerned," says Rex Morioka, a longtime patient. All his patients must sign a form stating they are aware of the doctor's uninsured status, a common practice among uninsured physicians. Dr. Macumber's form doesn't waive his patients' right to sue.

Going bare isn't limited to doctors. A number of nursing homes and hospitals across the country also have dropped liability coverage because of high premiums. In Arkansas, for instance, more than 100 nursing homes, out of a total of 237 in the state, had no liability insurance as of June 2003, according to the Arkansas Health Care Association. If a nursing home carries no insurance, injured residents might not be able to collect sufficient compensation, patient advocates say.

Off the Hook for $4 Million

What happens when patients sue a doctor without insurance? Patients often settle for less and do so more quickly because a doctor can file for bankruptcy, says Marc Singer, of Singer Xenos Wealth Management, Coral Gables, Fla., which advises doctors on how to protect their assets. Mr. Singer advises his clients first to hire a bankruptcy attorney, rather than a defense attorney, if they are sued. "What plaintiff's attorneys fear most in a lawsuit is bankruptcy," he says.

That's what happened in one such case, a dispute over a gall bladder surgery performed by a Florida surgeon, Alan Goldenberg. The patient, Shirley Sawczak, filed suit against him for malpractice. Dr. Goldenberg had no malpractice insurance and filed for Chapter 7 bankruptcy the same day the jury was to begin its deliberations in the suit.

Ms. Sawczak won a judgment for more than $4 million against the surgeon. While Dr. Goldenberg had nearly $3.8 million in assets, almost all of his money was held in his house, retirement accounts and other assets -- assets exempt from creditors under Florida law. The case reached the Supreme Court of Florida, which ruled that Dr. Goldenberg's annuities also were protected under Florida law. Ultimately, the $4 million judgment was discharged, meaning that Dr. Goldenberg was off the hook. Ms. Sawczak received nothing, according to her attorney.

Most states don't actually make doctors carry malpractice insurance. But hospitals and managed-care organizations often have insurance requirements, which makes going bare impractical for many physicians.

Florida law allows doctors to practice without liability insurance as long as they are financially responsible for as much as $250,000 of any judgment against them. If they fail to pay within 30 days of a judgment, they can lose their license. The state's laws also require doctors to post a notice in their waiting room or give a statement to patients saying they are uninsured. For patients in other states, medical licensing agencies generally track whether doctors have malpractice insurance, but the best and easiest way for a patient to find out for sure is to ask the doctor directly.

Promising Not to Sue

David Lee Vastola, a North Palm Beach internist and gastroenterologist, gave up his malpractice insurance two years ago, after his annual premium rose to $60,000 for only $250,000 in coverage from $12,000 for $1 million in coverage the year before. He has gone a step further than most physicians who go bare, by requiring his patients to sign a waiver promising not to sue him or his professional corporation for any reason.

All but one of his 10,000 patients have signed the waiver, although some potential new patients have refused and been turned away, he says. Whether the waiver is enforceable hasn't been tested in court.
 
I have been hearing a lot more about that final paragraph. Many doctors in Florida are forcing their patients to waive their rights to sue for malpractice. If the patient refuses, they're just sent elsewhere. It's an interesting idea, though of course the test of time remains...can it be enforceable in court?
 
I'm taking a Health Law and Policy class right now so I'll ask my prof about the legality of the waivers. I'll revive this if I get a response.
 
Wow - that article is very interesting! :clap:

Do you guys think that going without malpractice insurance is really a viable option?

I'd love to hear any other thoughts or experiences anyone here has with physicians who go 'bare'.

🙂
u2ecila
 
Originally posted by LaurieB
I'm taking a Health Law and Policy class right now so I'll ask my prof about the legality of the waivers. I'll revive this if I get a response.

barring gross and deliberate negligence [not just amputing the wrong leg but intentionally removing the wrong leg] on the part of the physicain or surgeonand provided the pt. wasn't coerced [sp?] into signing the waiver then these waivers will stand up in court.

it pry wouldn't be a bad idea for physicians with insurance to have new patient sign a binding agreement that would send disputes to an arbitrator or review commission to determine if the pt. has a legitimate claim and isn't just looking to cash in because of a bad outcome.
 
I read posting for physcian jobs and most say that they pay for malpractice insurance? How many jobs out there pay for it? Do most require the doctor to pay his/her own?
 
malpractice varies depending on type of policy, specialty, # of years in practice, location and a few other factors. If you'd like to see some real rates and how they vary by some of the above factors, you can check out the site for one of the major insurers in NYS -- www.mlmic.com and play around. For example, an occurrence policy in family practice, no surgery in Albany is about $4500 and in Manhattan $12000. OB/GYN in Manhattan is about $93K.

re: jobs offering malpractice - it's actually not uncommon to have jobs paying for malpractice insurance -- it's a way for the practice to ensure it's protected.
 
Arbitration has come up quite a bit in Utah as well, and now those attorneys that make their $ off of malpractice suits are suing IHC (Intermtn. Health Care) for imposing mandatory arbitration for lawsuits, even though the Utah legislature made it legal during the previous session to have a patient sign an arbitration agreement, or find service elsewhere.

Here is the story....
http://www.sltrib.com/2003/Dec/12032003/utah/116617.asp

The random part is that in every segment of american society, a business has the right to refuse service of an individual, this would include signing a waiver or an arbitration form. But for some reason, malpractice attorneys think that this is illegal (which it is not and has been done for years in several areas), immoral (we should not refuse service to anyone?!?!), and unethical (lawyers calling doctor unethical????? what is wrong w/that picture????).

Without fail, the arbitration law will be repealed (by law makers, who are mostly LAWYERS in the first place) and the physician's will return to being sued with ZERO repercussions for a frivilous lawsuit.

If you really think about it, an attorney can file a lawsuit for $20, and for you JUST TO RESPOND and successfully defend yourself can bankrupt you, REGARDLESS OF THE MERIT OF THE CASE. Any system where you can bankrupt one party to defend itself with ZERO consequences for the party that brought the frivilous suit is bullsh*t.

Attorneys say that it's wrong to take away a patients right to sue, when in reality they are thinking "if I take on 100 cases, statistically speaking 4 of those will get to trial, more will be settled, and the average jury verdict is $1mil on a trial. With a 40% contingency fee, I just pulled in $1.6 mil from the trials alone, plus any settlement $$$, plus any attorneys fees on top of that."

FYI I'm not speaking out of my a** as my father is an attorney (but not a malpractice one), my brother is a radiologist and I'm MII.
Makes for interesting dinner arguments.
 
Regarding salaries of various specialties, do most of the lists out there show salaries after all expenses and insurance, etc, or is that the salary before expenses? For example, one website said pediatricians make an average starting salary of 120,000. That is such a low number that I hope it is the salary after expenses.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
I would be amazed if a court would uphold a waiver agreement absent an action by the state legislature. The is a well know legal doctrine that allows courts to void contracts or contract provisions when they are contrary to "public policy". A waiver of the right to sue when a party is negligent imposes a burden on society to take care of the individual. Thus this would not be in the public's best interest.

I also question the ethics of forcing a patient to sign such a waiver.

Ed
 
Originally posted by edmadison
I would be amazed if a court would uphold a waiver agreement absent an action by the state legislature. The is a well know legal doctrine that allows courts to void contracts or contract provisions when they are contrary to "public policy". A waiver of the right to sue when a party is negligent imposes a burden on society to take care of the individual. Thus this would not be in the public's best interest.

I also question the ethics of forcing a patient to sign such a waiver.

Ed

I object to two things. The first is that it is not in the public's best interest to waive an individual's right to sue. On the one hand, there are plenty of cases of actual malpractice whereby a physician harms a patient due to carelessness for example (amputation of the wrong limb is an obvious example). However, there are many, many more cases of fraudalent malpractice cases involving family members who are grief stricken at the loss of a loved one and who then decide to take it out on their doctor, the person they see as being responsible. Believe it or not, there are cases of sons or daughters of 90 + yr. old patients suing their physicians because they think that the physician didn't do all they could to save their mother or father.

There are many other cases where a parent who's child is born with mental ******ation feels entitled to some compensation from the doctor who delievered the baby because perhaps they did something wrong at delivery to cause the problem. Obviously, many of these cases aren't sucessfully tried, but physicians still have to defend themselves which costs money. In addition, some of these cases succeed because the jury system our country employs doesn't necessarily understand medicine as well as physicians (obviously).

The self-interest of our nation is not to support frivolous lawsuits nor is it to drive physicians out of certain specialties which is exactly what is happening right now.

Second, as to "forcing" the patient to sign the waiver: this is nothing more than a contract. You sign the same thing everytime you go scuba diving, bungee cord diving, parachuting, etc... You don't have to sign, but take your business elsewhere should you choose not to. It's completely up to you. A physician (outside of an ER), is not legally bound to provide you service, and therefore they are free to impose legal stipulations upon their services if they so choose. Furthermore, the way these contracts work (or at least in florida), is that signing this contract allows your case to be tried in aribtration by a special panel made up of physicians. it is not a free way out for a physician to cover his rear-end.
 
Just as a real life example, my father (an internist) earned $250,000 this year...his take home was $86,000. Scary stuff man! My mom's a nurse and she made $67,000!
 
Honestly lawsuets are so out of hand in this country. Why do we not put a cap on how much a person gets? I can understand about a doctor messing up becuase of negligence, but to receive so much money is absurd. I wonder if it would be wrong to cap the percentage on what a lawyer gets. Make it harder for them to get so much. I do not know but somthing has to be done.
 
can you even imagine explaining how the difference between something like the difference between a tia and full stroke as they appear on a cat scan to 12 people too stupid to get out of jury duty? that's why we need arbitration boards.
 
Originally posted by Mew
Honestly lawsuets are so out of hand in this country. Why do we not put a cap on how much a person gets? I can understand about a doctor messing up becuase of negligence, but to receive so much money is absurd. I wonder if it would be wrong to cap the percentage on what a lawyer gets. Make it harder for them to get so much. I do not know but somthing has to be done.

Because those that make the laws are lawyers. Why would any lawyer destroy the biggest money making scam in the world?

My question is what exactly does a lawyer do? As far as I can tell they are bank transactions. All they do is move money from one acct into another acct, and take a very large percentage as a surcharge.

Instead of making caps (which I believe there should be), the biggest effect on frivolous lawsuits would be a system that would force the "loser" of the suit to pay for others legal fees. People would think twice about suing, in the litigious society we live.
stomper
 
loser pays also restricts the courts to those who can afford it.
 
Could be, but where do most of the frivolous lawsuits come from? How much income did those individuals who sued McDs for making them fat have? My bet is at or near poverty.

The wealthy dont sue the wealthy simply because they have "deep pockets", nor does the poor sue the poor because they dont have deep pockets, but I can assure you that you will be sued for that reason...whether youre liable or not. Even if your children do something, YOU will be sued as a physician, the individual with the deep pockets.

It has become custom in this country to "state" that one will sue, and its cheaper to settle out of court, rather than go to civil court. This is a big money ticket.
stomper
 
I was speaking to a nurse in an ER near my home and she said that CA already has a malpractice cap. She said it's upwards of $250,000. That's a lot less than 1 million, I tell ya. I'll do a search and update this post in a bit.
 
Originally posted by AlreadyInDebt
I was speaking to a nurse in an ER near my home and she said that CA already has a malpractice cap. She said it's upwards of $250,000. That's a lot less than 1 million, I tell ya. I'll do a search and update this post in a bit.

Ok, this sucks:

Taken From http://www.consumerwatchdog.org/healthcare/pr/pr003154.php3

The cap is $250,000, BUT...

By 1988, thirteen years after the passage of MICRA, California medical malpractice premiums had reached an all-time high -- 450% higher than in 1975, when MICRA was enacted;

Premiums dropped 20.2% during the first three years in which insurance reform Proposition 103 was in effect. The law mandated that rates be immediately rolled back 20%;

Insurance rates were frozen for four years;

Medical malpractice insurers refunded over $135 million to policyholders as a result of Proposition 103. By 1992, three of the state's largest medical malpractice insurance companies -- Norcal Mutual, SCPIE and The Doctors' Company -- had returned more than $69 million directly to physicians;

During the first twelve years of the malpractice caps in California, insurers spent less than 32 cents of every premium dollar compensating victims and more than 68 cents of every premium dollar on other costs such as overhead, profit and insurance defense lawyers;

In California, medical malpractice insurance companies spend 35% of premiums fighting claims, as compared to the national average of 21%.
 
Originally posted by facted
The self-interest of our nation is not to support frivolous lawsuits nor is it to drive physicians out of certain specialties which is exactly what is happening right now.

Second, as to "forcing" the patient to sign the waiver: this is nothing more than a contract. You sign the same thing everytime you go scuba diving, bungee cord diving, parachuting, etc... You don't have to sign, but take your business elsewhere should you choose not to. It's completely up to you. A physician (outside of an ER), is not legally bound to provide you service, and therefore they are free to impose legal stipulations upon their services if they so choose. Furthermore, the way these contracts work (or at least in florida), is that signing this contract allows your case to be tried in aribtration by a special panel made up of physicians. it is not a free way out for a physician to cover his rear-end.

Actually, the law recognizes that not all contracts are based on equal bargaining power. These are known as "contracts of adhesion". You can look at these at take-it-or-leave-it contracts. Courts are very skeptical of them because they doubt the whole idea of the meeting of the minds.

You give a an example of arbitration for malpractice in Florida -- These were created by action of the state legislature (which I mentioned in my original post). Some states prohibit the practice of requiring patients to sign arbitration agreements, another requires that the arbitration agreement bear the signature a the patient's attorney.

This area is so contraversial that the American Arbitration association will not administer malpracitce cases unless the arbitration agreement was signed after the event occured. There have also been some signs that providers accepting medicare and medicaid cannot reject patients for refusing to sign arbitration agreements

Ed
 
Top