White house official denies tort reform concerns from docs?

[OHMAN0125]

---

Members do not see this ad.

Please see letter link from ACR to the White House.

http://www.acr.org/SecondaryMainMen...ntACRNews/archive/ACRMedMalLettertoObama.aspx

I can't believe that a senior white house official actually stated that they haven't heard from physicians regarding tort reform when asked why malpractice reform wasn't included in the proposed bills.

Yes we haven't been complaining about tort reform for the past several years. What a joke. Lawyers stick together in the end. To think I actually thought Obama was going to "change" the tort system in the US. Looks like he has too many lawyer buddies. 👎

 

[bigal40]

Obama's healthcare bill isn't about making a positive change to the system or reducing costs. Obama's goal is to 1:make the federal governmentlarger and more powerful and 2:to tax the hardworking wealthy and redistribute the wealth to the unmotivated poor.

 

[Pinkertinkle]

as long as 90% of politicians are lawyers nothings gon change

 

[scotsdoc54]

Obama's healthcare bill isn't about making a positive change to the system or reducing costs. Obama's goal is to 1:make the federal governmentlarger and more powerful and 2:to tax the hardworking wealthy and redistribute the wealth to the unmotivated poor.

Right, because the wealthy have all worked really hard to earn their money, but everyone who is poor is so because they won't get off their rear and work. It's so simple! We can easily lump everyone into one giant, sweeping generalization....


It is unfortunate that the bills going through Congress (as there is NOT an healthcare bill that Obama has proposed like everyone likes to say) doesn't seriously look at tort reform. Any bill that passes without tort reform is going to be seriously lacking.

 

[FlowRate]

Right, because the wealthy have all worked really hard to earn their money, but everyone who is poor is so because they won't get off their rear and work. It's so simple! We can easily lump everyone into one giant, sweeping generalization....


It is unfortunate that the bills going through Congress (as there is NOT an healthcare bill that Obama has proposed like everyone likes to say) doesn't seriously look at tort reform. Any bill that passes without tort reform is going to be seriously lacking.

While I agree that there's no way you can say that "poor workers" are "lazy." I don't see how you can assert that the majority of wealthy people are not hard workers.


If you pass a bill that would probably end up lowering salaries, it would be an even greater injustice to not reduce the gigantic damages/malpractice insurance costs that those healthcare workers liable for today.

 

[scotsdoc54]

While I agree that there's no way you can say that "poor workers" are "lazy." I don't see how you can assert that the majority of wealthy people are not hard workers.


If you pass a bill that would probably end up lowering salaries, it would be an even greater injustice to not reduce the gigantic damages/malpractice insurance costs that those healthcare workers liable for today.

Lots of people inherit "old money" or money that parents/relatives already have. This is very much true in well established Fortune 500 companies. Lots of people earn a substantial living working hard, no question about it. But certainly not all as was implied by another poster.

 

[shindotp]

Lots of people inherit "old money" or money that parents/relatives already have. This is very much true in well established Fortune 500 companies. Lots of people earn a substantial living working hard, no question about it. But certainly not all as was implied by another poster.

At one point, the people who earned that money worked hard to get it, and they have a right to give their money to whomever they please.

If I die rich and my kids are rich and lazy, then taxing them would be - in a sense - taxing my money. What the hell was the point of working hard then?

There are a lot of reasons why people are poor such as disability, negative environment, etc. One of the main ones, though, is not working hard and dropping out of school. One of the ways to prevent this is through giving bigger incentives to stay in school and make money, which is the opposite of "redistributing wealth."

 

[JumboShrimp]

Obama's healthcare bill isn't about making a positive change to the system or reducing costs. Obama's goal is to 1:make the federal governmentlarger and more powerful and 2:to tax the hardworking wealthy and redistribute the wealth to the unmotivated poor.

You sound sooo ignorant! Not all poor people are unmotivated!! Have you ever heard of disabled people??!!! wow just wow...some of you future docs/docs make me sick! shame shame shame

 

[mfrizzo3]

You sound sooo ignorant! Not all poor people are unmotivated!! Have you ever heard of disabled people??!!! wow just wow...some of you future docs/docs make me sick! shame shame shame

Don't worry. In not too many years your job will be replaced by a vending machine.

 

[scotsdoc54]

At one point, the people who earned that money worked hard to get it, and they have a right to give their money to whomever they please.

If I die rich and my kids are rich and lazy, then taxing them would be - in a sense - taxing my money. What the hell was the point of working hard then?

There are a lot of reasons why people are poor such as disability, negative environment, etc. One of the main ones, though, is not working hard and dropping out of school. One of the ways to prevent this is through giving bigger incentives to stay in school and make money, which is the opposite of "redistributing wealth."

I'll be honest. I don't really understand your analogy. If you give your kids the money, it's no longer yours. I mean, to say that, you would also have to admit that the people that gave you your money originally (through business/hard work, what have you) still own "your" money per se.

But really, it's a moot point. No one is talking about taking everyone's income and redistributing it so that everyone has essentially the same income regardless of how hard they work.

 

[TopSecret]

Don't worry. In not too many years your job will be replaced by a vending machine.

Pharmacists are already being replaced by handheld devices that check for drug-drug interactions. You can probably download one for your phone.

 

[Law2Doc]

as long as 90% of politicians are lawyers nothings gon change

It has nothing to do with lawyers sticking together. It has everything to do with the fact that far more constituents are people who see themselves more likely to be patients suing doctors than being doctors. Politicians will always go where the vote is. The public doesn't want tort reform, they want the rich doctors to pay when they screw up. Doesn't matter if your congressman is a lawyer or a former piano teacher, he's still going to do what his voters want.

 

[TopSecret]

It has nothing to do with lawyers sticking together. It has everything to do with the fact that far more constituents are people who see themselves more likely to be patients suing doctors than being doctors. Politicians will always go where the vote is. The public doesn't want tort reform, they want the rich doctors to pay when they screw up. Doesn't matter if your congressman is a lawyer or a former piano teacher, he's still going to do what his voters want.

The doctors deal with the high cost of liability insurance by 1) not seeing risky or litigious patients (e.g., rather than operate on a patient near death, they just won't operate or get themselves involved in that patient's care), 2) reducing employee salaries and benefits, and 3) passing the cost onto the health care consumers.

So in the end the consumers pay more for their health care and high-risk patients are abandoned.

If doctors have no choice but to see high-risk patients, they will order comprehensive and expensive tests and request consults from all the specialties the hospital has to offer to reduce their share of the liability. They will also be fighting for the charts most of the time so that they can write 1000 word progress notes detailing their care.

 

[EricTan]

Has anyone considered changing malpractice lawsuits in order to eliminate a financial incentive for the patient? What if malpractice lawsuits could only result in reimbursement for necessary medical procedures that result from a mistake, but threatened a physician's license in some way instead of potentially allowing huge financial gain by the suffering patient? Medical mistakes cause suffering, that is true, but I don't think anyone is entitled to money for that. Shouldn't the lawsuit be about making the medical system safer by putting pressure on the physician to be competent in order to keep his license? The whole reason malpractice lawsuits exist is to ensure quality of medical care, I think that this would accomplish this but eliminate a lot of unnecessary lawsuits because patients would be suing for social good instead of their own personal benefit. Of course, lawyer fees would have to be paid somehow (entirely by the losing party?) in order to make this possible and not permit doctors to get lazy, but I think this could work. Any thoughts?

 

[TopSecret]

Has anyone considered changing malpractice lawsuits in order to eliminate a financial incentive for the patient? What if malpractice lawsuits could only result in reimbursement for necessary medical procedures that result from a mistake, but threatened a physician's license in some way instead of potentially allowing huge financial gain by the suffering patient? Medical mistakes cause suffering, that is true, but I don't think anyone is entitled to money for that. Shouldn't the lawsuit be about making the medical system safer by putting pressure on the physician to be competent in order to keep his license? The whole reason malpractice lawsuits exist is to ensure quality of medical care, I think that this would accomplish this but eliminate a lot of unnecessary lawsuits because patients would be suing for social good instead of their own personal benefit. Of course, lawyer fees would have to be paid somehow (entirely by the losing party?) in order to make this possible and not permit doctors to get lazy, but I think this could work. Any thoughts?

One way to curb frivolous lawsuits is to have the plaintiff (the person suing) pay for the defendant's legal fees and lost income if the plaintiff loses.

Another way is to ban contingent fees (i.e., plaintiff pays nothing unless he or she wins $$$). Many countries have banned contingent fees. But since the US has the most lawyers per capita in the world, I doubt this will happen.

Tort reform is needed. Otherwise, the US will be sued to death.


Also, I doubt you'll get tort reform from Democrats since they tried to get John Kerry and John Edwards into the White House. Both are personal injury lawyers who have made millions suing doctors.

 

[EricTan]

One way to curb frivolous lawsuits is to have the plaintiff (the person suing) pay for the defendant's legal fees and lost income if the plaintiff loses.

Another way is to ban contingent fees (i.e., plaintiff pays nothing unless he or she wins $$$). Many countries have banned contingent fees. But since the US has the most lawyers per capita in the world, I doubt this will happen.

Tort reform is needed. Otherwise, the US will be sued to death.

On some level I agree, but wouldn't that discourage necessary lawsuits from poor people who don't have that kind of money to risk?

 

[TopSecret]

On some level I agree, but wouldn't that discourage necessary lawsuits from poor people who don't have that kind of money to risk?

Lawyers can work for below market value like most doctors, you know.

Or are they not compassionate enough?

 

[rocketbooster]

One way to curb frivolous lawsuits is to have the plaintiff (the person suing) pay for the defendant's legal fees and lost income if the plaintiff loses.

Another way is to ban contingent fees (i.e., plaintiff pays nothing unless he or she wins $$$). Many countries have banned contingent fees. But since the US has the most lawyers per capita in the world, I doubt this will happen.

Tort reform is needed. Otherwise, the US will be sued to death.

this will never happen. I'm surrounded by lawyers all day so I am getting insight on how they think. while I consider it sleazy practice, lawyers think it is smart to play the system as much as possible in order to make as much money as possible despite who they hurt in the process. when I tell them that is sleazy, they respond with "doctors are on a higher pedestal than lawyers. lawyers work to make money. doctors work to help ppl and have ppl's lives in their hands. there is nothing worse than a sleazy doctor." 😡 hmm, I thought lawyers are supposed to defend the rights of people? last I checked, that was the purpose of lawyers. funny.

 

[TopSecret]

this will never happen. I'm surrounded by lawyers all day so I am getting insight on how they think. while I consider it sleazy practice, lawyers think it is smart to play the system as much as possible in order to make as much money as possible despite who they hurt in the process. when I tell them that is sleazy, they respond with "doctors are on a higher pedestal than lawyers. lawyers work to make money. doctors work to help ppl and have ppl's lives in their hands. there is nothing worse than a sleazy doctor." 😡 hmm, I thought lawyers are supposed to defend the rights of people? last I checked, that was the purpose of lawyers. funny.

If you want sleaze, google John Edwards. He made his fortunes suing doctors and then cheated on his wife who has cancer.

 

[rocketbooster]

If you want sleaze, google John Edwards. He made his fortunes suing doctors and then cheated on his wife who has cancer.

I know. 😡

 

[texahn]

The doctors deal with the high cost of liability insurance by 1) not seeing risky or litigious patients (e.g., rather than operate on a patient near death, they just won't operate or get themselves involved in that patient's care), 2) reducing employee salaries and benefits, and 3) passing the cost onto the health care consumers.

So in the end the consumers pay more for their health care and high-risk patients are abandoned.

If doctors have no choice but to see high-risk patients, they will order comprehensive and expensive tests and request consults from all the specialties the hospital has to offer to reduce their share of the liability. They will also be fighting for the charts most of the time so that they can write 1000 word progress notes detailing their care.

That is right on the money

 

[TopSecret]

I know. 😡

I have no confidence in lawyers. When I hired a traffic attorney to represent me in traffic court, the attorney forgot to show up on my court date. I was left with no representation. I was abandoned. Fortunately, the judge threw out my ticket. The lawyer called me later that day and said he wasn't going to charge me anything. 👎

(I got into an accident while making a left-turn out of the hospital parking garage after having been up all night taking care of critically ill patients. The force of the impact was enough to have killed me if I actually blew by the stop sign that the other driver had alleged and the car advanced far enough into the intersection so that my drivers side door would've been the point of impact.)

 

[bigal40]

You sound sooo ignorant! Not all poor people are unmotivated!! Have you ever heard of disabled people??!!! wow just wow...some of you future docs/docs make me sick! shame shame shame

I never said all poor people are unmotivated, but it is the unmotivated poor that Obama's plan will benefit the most.

What is with your extremly condescending tone - you sound just like all the democratic senators and representatives, when someone raises a vaild point all you do is blow it off and attack them.

 

[ihatewaiting]

At one point, the people who earned that money worked hard to get it, and they have a right to give their money to whomever they please.

If I die rich and my kids are rich and lazy, then taxing them would be - in a sense - taxing my money. What the hell was the point of working hard then?

There are a lot of reasons why people are poor such as disability, negative environment, etc. One of the main ones, though, is not working hard and dropping out of school. One of the ways to prevent this is through giving bigger incentives to stay in school and make money, which is the opposite of "redistributing wealth."

Who is John Galt?