Comments on: MEYER: Tort Reform, Texas Style

By: Frank Collins

Frank Collins — Thu, 29 Oct 2009 13:33:32 +0000

1) Juries have no role in settling malpractice disputes as these should go to review boards.
2) Juries do have a role in gross negligence which is criminal and not tort
3) Half of what I order, prescribe, incur costs doing, evaluating and performing is to achieve 100% perfection in patient care.
4) The law of diminishing returns applies when taking patient care from 99% to 100% efficacy and could be construed as covering my butt, aiming for the impossible, and satisfying unrealistic patient expectations (unless “someone else” is carrying those costs of course).
5) Since when does cash alleviate pain and suffering? What a miserable attempt to alter the physical realities of human existence.
6) Physician charges are capped by government price controls through Medicare. Why are not trial lawyers fees also capped?

By: GOLDIN: The Broken Record of Tort Reform | THE POLITICIZER

GOLDIN: The Broken Record of Tort Reform | THE POLITICIZER — Sat, 24 Oct 2009 19:15:01 +0000

[...] week, Politicizer Staff Writer Cynthia Meyer argued that tort reform, and not a public option, is the ‘real’ solution to health care. This has been the rallying cry for Republicans and other opponents of health care [...]

By: Om

Om — Fri, 16 Oct 2009 15:37:42 +0000

It seems in her case she could have sued for tangible losses (lost wages and medical fees) on top of additional pain and suffering, which should net her a pretty solid sum. Either way, no amount of money will get her back her life. But I am open to discuss many options about tort reform since anything is better than what we have now.

By: Colin MacDonald

Colin MacDonald — Fri, 16 Oct 2009 04:26:55 +0000

For the most part, I agree with your desire to see tort reform as a primary component in healthcare reform. However, as most tort laws applicable to medical situations are state laws, it would be difficult to address those issues in a federal bill. Procedural notes aside, my main desire is to comment on one point you make:

In general, the malpractice lawsuits in this country are ridiculous and do much more harm than good to the healthcare system. However, there is one specific point in the Texas reforms which worries me. The “pain and suffering cap,” enacted with the intent to avoid runaway juries awarding excessive payouts out of vindictive motives, limits the victims of malpractice cases to a quarter of a million dollars in all situations.

I had a teacher in high school who went in for an operation during which a surgeon carelessly mishandled a scalpel and caused irreparable lung damage which has forced her to carry an oxygen tank around with her for the rest of her life. Beyond that, any amount of physical exertion that would raise her respiratory rate could be highly dangerous. That means she can’t play with her kids, she cannot be intimate with her husband, and she has a lot of trouble continuing to do her job, though she cannot afford to quit. Is all of that for the rest of her life really only worth $250,000? In Texas, yes it is. This is a situation where she deserves far more than a quarter of a million dollars as the doctor is to blame for significant pain and suffering which will last the rest of her life.

With that in mind, I would recommend this: Rather than a strict line for a maximum award, give the authority to determine the amount of the pain and suffering award to a judge, rather than an untrained jury. These judges are in their positions because they are trusted to be prudent in their custodianship of justice. Set guidelines for them to determine the appropriate amount, but do not restrict it to a certain number so that cases with true merit are able to be adjudicated fairly.

This way, we can use tort reform to bring down one of the most out-of-control costs of healthcare, but in a responsible way.

By: California Momma

California Momma — Thu, 15 Oct 2009 21:03:51 +0000

I had no idea tort reform was even an option!

We should be trying tort reform for at least a trial-run before we get into this public option business.

Great article Ms. Meyer!

By: Alec Jacobs

Alec Jacobs — Thu, 15 Oct 2009 17:48:20 +0000

Tyler, it was a joke.

I suggest you keep reading.

By: Tyler Bilbo

Tyler Bilbo — Thu, 15 Oct 2009 17:01:37 +0000

“..recurring streak of insanity”

Sorry, but I stopped reading after that extremely juvenile description of Governor Dean.

By: Om

Om — Thu, 15 Oct 2009 13:07:53 +0000

Awesome.

The rising price of healthcare is in part due to the fact that doctors must cover their butt whenever they see a patient. If a patient comes in with what is obviously a just a headache, the doctor used to just talk to them for a minute and send then home with a Tylenol. Now they must go through the whole nine yards of “defensive medicine” and order medical procedures such as MRI’s just to make sure the patient does not have a .01% case of a more serious illness. Of course the cost gets passed on to the patient, and he ends up paying $3,000 just for the doctor to say what he already knew. It is also no coincidence that 7 out of 10 patients are given or prescribed some sort of medicine when they visit a doctor nowadays. The doctors must protect themselves and say “hey I did everything I could”