Posts Tagged ‘Personal Injury Lawyers’

Medical Malpractice Myths: Tort Reform Will Lower Insurance Rates (Part V)

Friday, November 20th, 2009

malpractice insurance premiums2 Medical Malpractice Myths: Tort Reform Will Lower Insurance Rates (Part V)Today is our Chicago injury and malpractice attorneys final installment of our commentary on “Five Myths of Medical Malpractice,” based on a report recently published by the American Association for Justice (AAJ).

Medical Negligence Myth #5: Tort Reform Will Lower Insurance Rates

Yesterday’s post, Myth #4 – Medical Malpractice Claims Drive-Up Doctors’ Insurance Premiums, discussed the false correlation between malpractice lawsuits and increases in insurance premiums.  Today’s post, Myth #5, deals with converse theory – whether medical liability reform (a form of “Tort Reform) will result in insurance companies lowering doctors’ insurance premiums.  The evidence shows this will not happen.

The evidence shows that any savings to insurance companies — in the form of lower payouts due to damages caps — are not passed down to doctors in the form of lower premiums. The savings are not passed down at all.

Indeed, this myth is easy to debunk because we can look at states that have adopted medical tort reform to see whether insurance rates have gone down.  Texas, for example, enacted a $500,000 cap on non-economic damages for malpractice claims in 2003, believing such caps would translate into lower insurance premiums and attract more doctors.

As the AAJ report shows, although the number of doctors in Texas slightly increased after caps were imposed (as did all states), the increase was no different than before the caps were in place.  The increase has remained steady, as it has throughout the country.  If malpractice damage caps resulted in significantly lower premiums, the increase in doctors practicing in Texas since 2003 should have been more dramatic.

More importantly, since enacting caps on non-economic damages in Texas, doctors’ premiums have gone up instead of down.  The AAJ report cites GE Medical Protective, the country’s largest medical malpractice insurance provider, that said “caps had a negligible impact on rates” — and proceeded to raise doctor premiums.

The same holds true for California — which is depicted in the chart above.  After California enacted laws capping damages in medical malpractice actions, doctors’ insurance premiums continued to increase even faster than in previous years.  The way California leveled-off premiums was by passing legislation aimed at the insurance industry – by capping their insurance rates.

The AAJ report also cites a number of “pro tort reformers” who admit that, despite what has been argued, tort reform will do little, or nothing, to curb rising premiums. It will only serve to further curb the rights of individuals to seek justice after being wronged.

Those who argue for malpractice reform often cite the five myths discussed this week by our top-rated Chicago personal injury lawyers. Such arguments clearly ignore patient safety, as well as the empirical evidence.  Hopefully, the Senate will debate its health care bill using facts, not myths.

For a Free Consultation with one of our Chicago personal injury and malpractice attorneys, call Passen Law Group at (312) 527-4500.

share save 171 16 Medical Malpractice Myths: Tort Reform Will Lower Insurance Rates (Part V)

Medical Malpractice Myths: Drive-Up Doctors’ Insurance Premiums (Part IV)

Thursday, November 19th, 2009

Insurance Premium vs Paid Medical Malpractice Myths: Drive Up Doctors Insurance Premiums (Part IV)

Day four of our personal injury lawyers‘ discussion of “Five Myths of Medical Malpractice.”  Here’s Myth #4:

Medical Malpractice Myth #4: Medical Malpractice Claims Drive Up Doctors’ Premiums

This myth continues to be spread by the health insurance lobby, despite being continuously debunked by empirical evidence.  The argument works as follows:  to protect against large payouts from medical malpractice verdicts or settlements, insurance companies must raise premiums on doctors’ malpractice insurance, which doctors are required to pay under state law regulations regarding the carrying of malpractice insurance.  Makes sense, right?

However, the actual facts present a different picture.  The Americans for Insurance Reform (AIR), a national coalition of public interest organizations, conducted a study that found no correlation between malpractice lawsuits and high premiums paid by doctors.  In other words, malpractice lawsuits brought by personal injury lawyers do not provide any justification for high premiums.

Instead, the study found that doctors’ increasing insurance premiums relate to the insurance industry’s bad investments and the downturn in the economy — what the authors call the “economic cycle of the insurance industry.”  The AAJ report explains insurance companies are heavily reliant on two sources of income:  (1) underwriting income and (2)  investment income.  Underwriting income is the amount of premiums the insurance companies do not “give back” in payouts, whereas investment income is the money the insurance companies make investing the premiums — in the stock market, real estate and other investments.

If investment income is strong, then insurance companies lower premiums “to attract more policyholders and increase their market share.” More policies holders paying smaller premiums gives them more investment money while also increasing the number of people who will inevitably have to pay higher premiums, which deepens the pockets of the insurance company even further.

However, if investment income is weak — and the steep economic downturn and stock market collapse the past few years have made insurance companies’ investment income weak — insurance companies raise premiums to allow their underwriting income to make up for their loss in investment income.

None of this has anything to do with medical malpractice claims, despite what insurance companies argue.  This point is made clear in a separate AAJ report about the 10 largest malpractice insurance companies.  That report found that “malpractice insurance companies have underestimated profits and overestimated losses in part to justify new legislation to restrict the rights of those injured by medical negligence.”

As the health care debate now moves to the Senate, the hope is that new health care reform will take into account this new information and set new health insurance regulations accordingly so that cost savings are not made at the expense of patient rights and safety.  To speak with one of our experienced Chicago injury and malpractice attorneys, call Passen Law Group at (312) 527-4500 for a Free Consultation.

share save 171 16 Medical Malpractice Myths: Drive Up Doctors Insurance Premiums (Part IV)

OSHA Issues Largest-Ever Fine Against BP for Safety Violations

Thursday, November 5th, 2009

Last week, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) issued a record-breaking $87.43 million in proposed fines against BP Products North America Inc. for “failure to correct potential hazards faced by employees” that contributed to a refinery explosion in 2005 that killed 15 people and injured 170 others.  No doubt, this explosion also resulted in several personal injury and wrongful death lawsuits against BP for their negligence.

The fine trumps a previous fine of $21 million, also levied against BP in 2005. A press release from OSHA states that BP was issued 270 notices of “failure to abate” per the settlement agreement for the 2005 explosion. BP was also cited for “439 new willful violations for failures to follow industry-accepted controls on the pressure relief safety systems and other process safety management violations.” In the four years BP was given to comply with the settlement, it failed to do so while also failing to maintain safety standards not previously identified.  The personal injury and wrongful death lawyers will certainly attempt to use this information in the civil litigation to show that BP was on notice of dangerous safety violations.

OSHA safety violations are no trivial matter, regardless of workplace. As evidenced in this case, violations can lead to permanent injury or death.

Most private businesses in the United States must adhere to the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970. The Act outlines specific rules for the safety and well being of all workers, whether are a refinery, at a construction site or in an office. Employers must provide “a place of employment [that is free] free from recognized hazards that are causing or are likely to cause death or serious physical harm to employees.” Such hazards include:
•    Vehicles such as forklifts
•    Ladders
•    Scaffolding
•    Hazardous materials
•    Machinery

There are also regulations regarding safety, such as placement of medical and first aid kits, fire extinguishers, proper ventilation and protective devices or coverings for workers as well as tools.

More states, such as Illinois, are also being granted federal approval to administer their own safety and health plan for public employees, such as state and local government workers and public educators. Typically, public workers are exempt, or excluded from OSHA protections.

If you or a loved on has been seriously injured in the workplace, and you suspect safety violations were violated, contact an experienced Chicago personal injury lawyerat Passen Law Group today.  Call us at (312) 527-4500 for a free consultation.

share save 171 16 OSHA Issues Largest Ever Fine Against BP for Safety Violations