Beware judicial hellholes says President

Posted : Sun, 09 Jan 2005 00:00:00 GMT
Author : Jas. N.
Category : Health
News Alerts by Email ( click here )
Health News | Home
In next few days you will hear a lot from President Bush, as he will be bashing trial lawyers and medical malpractice lawsuits. Beware "judicial hellholes," said President Bush last week when he made a visit to Illinois. He was talking specifically about Madison County and St. Clair County during his visit to Illinois.

Statistics show that towering medical malpractice insurance rates have driven more than 160 doctors out of Southern Illinois in the last few years. This has put the area on an acute shortage of doctors.

Then why bash litigates for it? Because it is politically advantageous. Trial lawyers are key donors of the Democratic Party. Small-business owners and insurance companies are important donors to the Republican Party. So who else can be better targets than them?

But will this really improve the health care system? It doesn’t seem so at least to the team of economists and law professors appointed by the White House for studying the medical malpractice issue.

They view that we need a system that will focus on reducing errors rather than fixing what’s done. A proper vigilance by medical professionals on themselves will be better than law forcing them to do so. They envisage a system where the small minority of doctors who lead to errors and ultimately lead to hike in the medical insurance premiums should be identified and be scrapped out of the system.

But it seems like President Bush does not want to swallow this pill.

Copyright, respective author or news agency

Share/Save/Bookmark

Article : Beware judicial hellholes says President
Print this article
Email this article

Stay Updated
News gadget on your Google homepage
Subscribe to a news feed in Google Reader



Have your Say
Name
Email
Subject
Your Comment

Enter Verification code
 
  

 

 
Your Comments

Litigation and Cost of Health Care
By: Tom Eans MD , Fri, 16 Dec 2005 05:40:59 GMT

Your article in Earth Times drew the wrong conclusion. It was based on what you report as the conclusion of some "economist and law professors appointed by the White House". Whatever the facts of that are, the conclusions are wrong.
1. Litigation and the threat of it are real, not imagined, problems in the cost and availability of medical care. It is overwhelmingly obvious that this is driven by the heavy advertising of trial lawyers to encourage law suites and the increasing desire of our pampered society to blame someone for anything that goes wrong--and to lie if that achieves the purpose. Expert witnesses make a living lying on the witness stand for lawyers. It is definite that the defendent expert witnesses in physician litigation are more reputable than those of the plantiffs. They much less frequently make a living testifying for money.
2. It is human to err. Part of the falacy of the propsal to have a physician error recognition plan to somehow avoid litigation is that physicians err more than others and the patient never errs and that these errors have major significance. The widely promoted news report of 1 - 2 years ago about hundreds of thousands of medical errors being committed per year was just foolish. This counts a very large number of simple things that result in no harm whatsoever. You should never base a nationwide plan on such flawed data. It is also nonsense to claim that the problem is solvable by just apologizing for all these perceived errors and offering the "injured party" money.



More Health News click here
Follow The Earth Times
Subscribe to RSS Follow Earth Times on TwitterNews by email
Share/Save/Bookmark

 
 



 
Subscribe to free Earthtimes
News Alerts by Email Click here
For RSS Feeds Click here
or Create your own RSS

Add to Google Toolbar
Breaking News
Press Releases


The Earth Times
News Category

© 2009 www.earthtimes.org, The Earth Times, All Rights Reserved | Privacy Policy
Earth Times accept no responsibility or liability either directly or indirectly for views or opinions expressed in articles or comments.