Posts Tagged ‘medical negligence attorney’

Myths of Medical Malpractice: Drives Up Health Care Costs (Part II)

Tuesday, November 17th, 2009

As noted in yesterday’s post, each day this week our Chicago personal injury lawyers are addressing one of Five Myths of Medical Negligence, as reported earlier this month by the American Association for Justice.  Here is Myth #2:

Medical Negligence Myth #2: Malpractice Claims Drive Up Health Care Costs

There is no question that the cost of health care is out of control, and must be curtailed as part of health care reform.  However, there is absolutely no empirical evidence showing that medical malpractice liability has anything but a marginal impact on health care costs. That’s putting aside the benefits of medical malpractice liability, in the form of increased patient safety, deterrence of negligent medical conduct, and compensating victims of medical negligence.

The AAJ report cites two recent studies:  one conducted by the United States Government Accountability Office (GAO), and another done by the Congressional Budget Office (CBO).  Both studies reach the same conclusion: the affect of malpractice claims on health care costs is marginal, at best.  Indeed, data from 2007 from the National Association of Insurance Commissioners — an organization of state insurance regulators — supports this conclusion, showing that merely 0.3% of the $2.2 trillion spent on health care is spent on malpractice claims.

This dollar figure spent on malpractice claims is substantially less than the $29 billion in measurable “costs” of preventable medical errors — including future medical care, but not including emotional and other non-liquidated damages.  If this “myth” concerning the relationship between medical malpractice claims and health care costs was correct, the percentage of health care costs associated with malpractice claims would be substantially higher than 0.3%.  Note that this figure of 0.3% does not come from a biased or partisan study — it comes directly from the insurance companies.

Nonetheless, the insurance lobby has argued that doctors practice “defensive medicine” — the ordering of unnecessary tests and procedures — out of the fear of medical malpractice liability, rather than simply following the appropriate standard of care in treating patients.  However, missing from the discussion is the fact that, in most institutions and contexts, doctors make more money if they perform more tests and procedures.  In other words, they get paid based on the act of performing a test or procedure, not based on the outcome of the test or procedure.  This also begs the question whether significantly less tests and procedures is the answer, given that each year hundreds of thousands of people are seriously injured or killed by medical malpractice.

At Passen Law Group, we will continue to fight for the rights of individuals, and their families, who are victims of medical malpractice.  To speak with one of our Chicago medical malpractice attorneys, call us at (312) 527-4500 for a free consultation.

share save 171 16 Myths of Medical Malpractice: Drives Up Health Care Costs (Part II)

Myths of Medical Malpractice: ‘Frivolous’ Lawsuits (Part One)

Monday, November 16th, 2009

myth frivolous malpractice suits 300x215 Myths of Medical Malpractice: Frivolous Lawsuits (Part One)During this time of intense health care reform in Congress — with the House having passed a health care reform bill without major draconian medical liability reform, and the Senate soon to begin its debate over a bill — it’s time for experienced personal injury lawyers to separate truth from fiction when it comes to the relationship between medical malpractice laws, insurance and the practice of medicine.  This month, the American Association for Justice (AAJ) released a recent report titled “Five Myths of Medical Negligence.” The bottom line of this report is that none of the proposals for medical malpractice reform will lower the cost of health care, prevent “frivolous” lawsuits, or improve the practice of medicine, including patient safety.

Instead, such “tort reform” simply distract attention away from the true source of rising health care costs — the insurance industry.  More fundamentally, though, the question really is why “patient safety” is taking a back seat to “cost savings.”  This is especially true considering that patient safety is key to lowering health costs.

This week, our Chicago medical malpractice attorneys will present these five myths, one at a time, so that the public understands the issues and the facts.

A focus solely on money, though, ignores the issue of patient safety. And as the AAJ report demonstrates, patient safety takes a back seat to “cost savings” when patient safety is key to achieving cost savings.

Before delving into the details and separating fact from fiction, it is important to define what is meant by “medical malpractice” or “medical negligence.”  Medical malpractice (or negligence) is when a licensed medical professional, such as a physician or nurse, deviates from the “appropriate standard of care,” resulting in injury or death to the patient.  Malpractice covers a wide-range of issues, from failure to obtain consent before a procedure to hypoxia-induced Cerebral Palsy to death, and many areas in between.  Therefore, it is important to have an experienced personal injury and medical malpractice attorney review your case if you suspect malpractice occurred.

Now it is time to address the five myths of medical malpractice, which will be presented over the course of the week.

Medical Negligence Myth #1: There are Too Many “Frivolous Malpractice” Lawsuits

This is a common complaint levied by right-wing politicians (backed by the insurance lobbyists) and some from the medical industry, including the American Medical Association lobby.  It is important to define what they mean by “frivolous.”

In a legal context, a “frivolous” lawsuit is one that is filed without legal merit. Legal merit is determined by what is called “due diligence,” or a person and his or her lawyer’s duty to investigate the the facts and law before filing a lawsuit.  Lawyers are ethically and legally bound (by both state and federal law) to only pursue lawsuits filed in “good faith.”  If a lawyer files a “frivolous” lawsuit, that lawyer can be sanctioned by a judge under both state and federal law.

If the threat of sanction was not enough of a deterrent, several states, including Illinois have added extra protections to prevent frivolous medical malpractice lawsuits.  In Illinois, a plaintiff who files a medical negligence lawsuit must attach a sworn affidavit from a medical expert in the appropriate field of specialty (typically, practicing doctor) stating that the doctor believes a meritorious action exists against the defendant doctors/hospitals for medical malpractice.  Therefore, in most lawsuits criticized as “frivolous,” a medical professional has stated his or her belief that the lawsuit has merit.

This myth has been debunked by empirical evidence.  According to the Institute of Medicine (IOM), an independent nonprofit organization that “serves as an adviser to the nation to improve health,” 98,000 people a year die from preventable medical errors.  If a substantial number of people really were filing frivolous medical malpractice lawsuits, then the majority, if not all, 98,000 people killed each year due to preventable medical errors would file a claim.  However, the AAJ report cites a Harvard study showing that only one in eight people injured as a result of medical negligence actually files a malpractice lawsuit.

The bottom line is that it is not in either the injured plaintiff’s interest or the personal injury lawyer’s interest (who typically receives compensation only if the lawsuit is successful) to file a “frivolous” medical negligence lawsuit.  There are stringent state and federal laws that prevent such lawsuits from being filed, including the requirement of a medical professional’s certificate of merit.  Further, the empirical evidence shows that the number of malpractice lawsuits being filed, as compared to the number of actual cases of medical negligence, is strikingly small.

At Passen Law Group, our Chicago personal injury attorneys are committed to preserving access to the civil justice system for families and individual victims of medical negligence.  For a free consultation with one of our lawyers, call us at (312) 527-4500.

share save 171 16 Myths of Medical Malpractice: Frivolous Lawsuits (Part One)

‘Sorry’ Doesn’t Cut it in Serious Medical Malpractice Cases

Friday, September 4th, 2009

medical malpractice apology 300x300 Sorry Doesnt Cut it in Serious Medical Malpractice CasesA recent story from the Associated Press notes how the University of Michigan Health System has adopted a policy of admitting mistakes and offering compensation to victims of medical malpractice before patients retain a medical malpractice lawyer and files a lawsuit.  In theory, this policy sounds great.  The story quotes the hospital’s chief risk officer and veteran malpractice defense lawyer as saying, “What we are doing is common decency.”  Well, now you’re pushing it.

No one can disagree that when one makes a mistake, including medical negligence, it helps to receive a sincere apology for the mistake.  However, the decision to admit to medical mistakes is a business decision, not an altruistic decision.  Indeed, the article notes that since adopting this “sorry” policy, malpractice claims against the University of Michigan Health System dropped in half from 2001 to 2006.  Further, costs per claim were also reduced 50 percent, and insurance reserves dropped by two-thirds.  This apology approach to medical malpractice has the strongest support from the insurance companies.

The problem with this approach is that those who are most seriously injured as a result of medical malpractice and those who are most  vulnerable — children, elderly, the poor — do not know what their legal rights are when they decide to settle their claim (and waive their rights to ever file a lawsuit) after accepting “apology money.”  The fact that the medical professionals have apologized, and the hospital is willing to offer money at the outset, suggest that the injured person (and his or her family) is legally entitled to be compensated for that injury.

No doubt that the hospital’s offer to settle the claim will not fully compensate the injured person to the full extent of the law.  Especially in situations where the injury is significant and permanent, the victims will not be an a position to grasp the full impact of the malpractice on his or her life into the future.  Those injured in medical malpractice claims should be compensated for past, present and future medical expenses, as well as past, present and future wage loss, emotional and physical pain and suffering, and loss of normal life or disability.  The apology approach to medical negligence is a way to save insurance companies money at the expense of those victims most in need of help.

Public studies show that although approximately 181,000 people are seriously injured or killed each year as a result of medical malpractice in the United States, only 30,000 (16 percent) file medical malpractice lawsuits.  Top medical malpractice lawyers suggest that the right of injured patients to sue doctors and hospitals for medical mistakes, and question them in public civil justice proceedings, is critical to reduce future medical mistakes and improve overall care.

This apology approach to medical malpractice sounds better in theory than it does in practice.  Only after consulting with an experienced medical negligence lawyer, and having your medical records reviewed by a top, independent medical consultant, will you truly appreciate the value of your case under the law.  For a free consultation with a top Chicago medical malpractice lawyer, call Passen Law Group at (312) 527-4500.

share save 171 16 Sorry Doesnt Cut it in Serious Medical Malpractice Cases