the five mean states are???

[kahoo99]

---

Members do not see this ad.

Ok so i did several searches on SDN and I found some conflicting info. Which states require an AOA approved intership for licensure?
Penn, Mich, Okla, Fla, and W Vir?

or is Ohio one of them?

Does anyone know for sure?

thanks

 

[DOtobe]

Those are the five.

 

[kahoo99]

So no to ohio...think they'll keep randle el?

 

[DOtobe]

I hope so!

 

[TCOM-2006]

So no to ohio...think they'll keep randle el?

i posted on the other thread about this - ohio is NOT one of them so far as i know. i have never seen it listed as such, and i am applying to and ranking acgme internal medicine programs there - and have not had any questions about this during my interviews. ohio does have a pretty good amount of osteopathic residencies, compared to many other places.

one other thing that i did hear of, however, is the oklahoma will let you substitute an acgme 'transitional' year that has all the components they want, instead of doing an aoa.

if you want to verify a state for sure - you can get contact info for the specific state medical board and call / email them or check their website:

http://www.fsmb.org/directory_smb.html

 

[raptor5]

Oklahoma is not necessarily a mean state, that is if you are going into primary care. Most if not all ACGME FM programs qualify you for licensure. PA on the other hand is just more concerned with filling their ROI spots than training physicians. Some (not many, not all) of those internships would not stand a chance gaining ACGME cert as a Transitional year (besides the difference in curriculum), but the same could be said for some of the residencies as well.

 

[Old_Mil]

Ok so i did several searches on SDN and I found some conflicting info. Which states require an AOA approved intership for licensure?
Penn, Mich, Okla, Fla, and W Vir?

or is Ohio one of them?

Does anyone know for sure?

thanks

You probably don't want to practice in PA, FL, or WV due to malpractice issues anyway.

 

[kahoo99]

what's unique in their malpractice laws?

 

[medhacker]

You probably don't want to practice in PA, FL, or WV due to malpractice issues anyway.

I think malpractice suits in FL recenlty got capped to 100K max, so things are actually looking up for physicians at least in FL.

 

[OSUdoc08]

I think malpractice suits in FL recenlty got capped to 100K max, so things are actually looking up for physicians at least in FL.

I would have to disagree. They just recently passed a "3 strikes and you're out" malpractice suit law.

 

[Monty Python]

I would have to disagree. They just recently passed a "3 strikes and you're out" malpractice suit law.

What if you're a high visibility target by unscrupulous plaintiff lawyers, and you're sued frequently, and your insurance company settles out of court to prevent an otherwise-winnable, but expensive to win, lawsuit? Do three out of court settlements mean you lose your license? That seems grossly unfair, after all, this country is founded on the principal of innocent until proven guilty IN COURT.

 

[OSUdoc08]

What if you're a high visibility target by unscrupulous plaintiff lawyers, and you're sued frequently, and your insurance company settles out of court to prevent an otherwise-winnable, but expensive to win, lawsuit? Do three out of court settlements mean you lose your license? That seems grossly unfair, after all, this country is founded on the principal of innocent until proven guilty IN COURT.

I'm not sure on the specifics of the law, but you may be right. It is a highly controversial law that IS very unfair.

 

[medhacker]

I would have to disagree. They just recently passed a "3 strikes and you're out" malpractice suit law.

Yeah the 3 strikes u'r out law is really deplorable (BTW it is not 3 lawsuits you are out but 3 judgements) - it was a means for some lawyers to establish a cash flow.

Nonetheless with the malpractice suit cap (which came afterwards and I suspect as a retaliation of physicians to the previous 3 strike -out law) might help somewhat since lawyers have to think twice about the kind of cases they want to pursue (after all it is only 100K max they can get now) and it should also help malpractice insurance rates for lawsuits settled out of court, by law can not be higher than 100K.

The former law would have allowed a great number of frivolous suits to be filed, and the second kind of helps reduce the number of such frivolous suits. I know about 4 doctors in florida very well, and none of them is leaving with the current state of things...

 

[medhacker]

What if you're a high visibility target by unscrupulous plaintiff lawyers, and you're sued frequently, and your insurance company settles out of court to prevent an otherwise-winnable, but expensive to win, lawsuit? Do three out of court settlements mean you lose your license? That seems grossly unfair, after all, this country is founded on the principal of innocent until proven guilty IN COURT.

Lawsuits are not part of the 3 you are out count - they have to be actual judgements. 🙂

 

[DrRobert]

Lawsuits are not part of the 3 you are out count - they have to be actual judgements. 🙂

Judgment = Settlement

Most malpractice cases are settled. Remember that.

 

[medhacker]

Judgment = Settlement

Most malpractice cases are settled. Remember that.

A malpractice claim settled out-of-court is not a legal judgement. For the purposes of the law they have to go to court (and be found against by a judge or jury) to count. malpractice claims settled out-of-court are not affected by the 3 strike law.

 

[DrMom]

Lawsuits are not part of the 3 you are out count - they have to be actual judgements. 🙂

Gee, don't you think the lawyers are happy to file malpractice cases knowing that FL doctors are going to want to settle rather than risk a case going to court and possibly counting towards their 3?

 

[medhacker]

Gee, don't you think the lawyers are happy to file malpractice cases knowing that FL doctors are going to want to settle rather than risk a case going to court and possibly counting towards their 3?

This was their intention all along... a great cash cow, but once the fee cap at 100k came in things changed. I can tell you from (anecdotal) experience, a friend of mine received medical malpractice in Florida since the docs did not care well for his injured foot and last I heard he was very close to losing it. Nonetheless, losing his foot was not as depressive to him, his family, and his attorney as the fee cap was.


So yes, it is easier to file frivolous suits, but at a lower rate each, this in general is not attractive to most attorneys - there isn't much to spare when your max is 100k.

 

[DrMom]

interesting. thanks for the info

 

[DeLaughterDO]

I think malpractice suits in FL recenlty got capped to 100K max, so things are actually looking up for physicians at least in FL.

Surely this isn't a $100k max for the entire suit - this must be a non-economic damages cap like we have here in Tx. Hell, the earning potential of most people in the united states (much less medical expenses that would have to be covered if the suit were legitimate) would overshadow this amount...

I would totally disagree with this cap if it were an entire suit cap - if it's non-economic "punitive damages" that are capped, more power to you!

I do agree that putting caps on non-economic damages will make lawsuits much less appealing to med-mal lawyers - the punitive damages are where you got the 40 million dollar declarations (and where the lawyers made their mad cash --> 30% of 40 mil = 13.3 mil gross!!). Lost wages and medical expenses just don't (usually) add up to so much that hundreds of med-mal lawyers will jump up to take the case.

Just hope the law isn't set up to where the judge can "set aside" the cap if he/she so desires. That's bullshiite!!

Sorry for the rambling - I've been up too long...

jd

 

[medhacker]

Surely this isn't a $100k max for the entire suit - this must be a non-economic damages cap like we have here in Tx. Hell, the earning potential of most people in the united states (much less medical expenses that would have to be covered if the suit were legitimate) would overshadow this amount...

I would totally disagree with this cap if it were an entire suit cap - if it's non-economic "punitive damages" that are capped, more power to you!

I do agree that putting caps on non-economic damages will make lawsuits much less appealing to med-mal lawyers - the punitive damages are where you got the 40 million dollar declarations (and where the lawyers made their mad cash --> 30% of 40 mil = 13.3 mil gross!!). Lost wages and medical expenses just don't (usually) add up to so much that hundreds of med-mal lawyers will jump up to take the case.

Just hope the law isn't set up to where the judge can "set aside" the cap if he/she so desires. That's bullshiite!!

Sorry for the rambling - I've been up too long...

jd

The cap is not on the whole suit. It is on attorney's fees (BTW it is not a standard 100K max it is a percentage table - nonetheless it works out to low six figures in the "worst cases"). By having passed this bill the intention is to dissuade attorneys from filing frivolous suits which at the end are which ruin malpractice insurance rates for Docs.


Oh yes, attorneys appealed to the FL supreme court to be able to have clients waive the cap. The AMA in florida is lobbying to prevent it from passing and I think they want to pass an additional bill prohibiting attorneys from requestion fee cap waivers.

😱

 

[DeLaughterDO]

The cap is not on the whole suit. It is on attorney's fees (BTW it is not a standard 100K max it is a percentage table - nonetheless it works out to low six figures in the "worst cases"). By having passed this bill the intention is to dissuade attorneys from filing frivolous suits which at the end are which ruin malpractice insurance rates for Docs.


Oh yes, attorneys appealed to the FL supreme court to be able to have clients waive the cap. The AMA in florida is lobbying to prevent it from passing and I think they want to pass an additional bill prohibiting attorneys from requestion fee cap waivers.

😱

It isn't the frivolous lawsuits which have ruined malpractice rates. The problem, instead, lies with the cause of all the frivolous lawsuits: The "Lottery Mentality" that americans have so readily adopted. People no longer want to work for a living, they want everything given to them. If they can find someone to give them a huge boatload of cash, why not take it? The lawyers are only fulfilling a demand - a sad one, but it is still there.

While I applaud the malpractice caps, etc, I think we really need to re-evaluate our national attitudes. This is no longer the land of milk and honey. It is the land of "gimme gimme gimme," broken bureaucracy, overburdened social systems, and a medical system that is about to collapse. Nevermind the horrible job market in this country.

but that's for another discussion.

jd

 

[DeLaughterDO]

wow, after reading that I'm suddenly very depressed...

 

[medhacker]

The "Lottery Mentality" that americans have so readily adopted. People no longer want to work for a living, they want everything given to them. If they can find someone to give them a huge boatload of cash, why not take it? The lawyers are only fulfilling a demand - a sad one, but it is still there.

That quality is already ingrained in human nature, the free market philosophy only fosters it even more...

 

[DO Sigma Nu guy]

wow, after reading that I'm suddenly very depressed...

I am also depressed. 😡