One solution I like is called, I think, “the English rule”: If a patient/lawyer sues a doctor and loses the suit, the loser pays the legal costs of the defendent.

You can bet that would make marginal cases and frivolous lawsuits disappear! In our current system, it’s a lottery for the patient and his lawyers: relatively low cost to play, but potentially huge pay-off.

Michigan’s review board sounds like one of the better ideas. Caps are good but, as you noted, legitimate claims would be left out. However, could there not be exceptions written into them or perhaps combine caps with review boards?

There are more than 1 kind of malpractice. In Danny’s “chemo” case currently in the news. Alternative medicine is a very viable consideration. Although I was cured of a 98% fatal lung cancer by an alternative clinic in Mexico after my agonizing chemo treatments failed in the U.S., FDA approved alternative clinics are all over the US including one in Santa Barbara and one in Scottsdale. The treatments are natural and generally without side effects. Check out my web page and video at http://www.survivingsmallcell.com.

Rationing of care will happen with healthcare reform. That has both good and bad aspects. However, it is up to the doctor and the healthcare team to provide all the possible treatment and diagnostic options to the patient. The patient then has to choose. Do they want the stuff that is not covered under their health plan? If the doctor writes the order it is not their fault if the diagnostics were cancled by the patient out of fear their plan would not cover the expense. The healthcare plan is beyond the doctors control but the wrting of the order is not.

I court reported many medical malpractice cases in south Florida, ending in l988. Doctors there were aggressive and would not testify for a plaintiff, making it unlikely a claim would succeed, therefore lawyers were few who would do medical malpractice. Lawyers who did do medical malpractice and succeed had some anxiety about whether they would be treated in a hospital honestly.
Frivolous medical malpractic suits did not make it past infancy. Doctors were upset that anyone would even make a beginning of a claim. Upset is putting it mildly.
Doctors are paranoid, and many feel they have a right to make mistakes. Doctors protect other doctors who are dangerous practitioners: Getting them out of a hospital is near impossible even for egregious acts.
EXAMPLE: There was a ENT surgeon who got away with always doing radical surgery to remove jawbones, because of the way the lab delivered the results during surgery. The Catholic hospital covered his butt. I know: My husband was the risk manager of that hospital.
No one is always right and no one is always wrong, but, personally, I would rather die a natural death unmolested than be treated by medicine as it is practiced in the United States.

I just read the selfserving artical by Dr. Marc Siegel involving medical malpractice.

First of all what the Dr did not tell you is that doctors and hospitals have lobbiests just like the Attorneys. That is why many states have put medical caps on the law suits regardless of damage. It is sad but due to the work of the lobbiest groups thousands of Americans have not only lost everything they own to pay for medical bills not covered due to the medical caps but find themselves having to get their medical bills caused by malpractice and limited by a lawsuit cap..Thats right the tax payers paying the medical bill created by a doctor that should not be practicing in the first place.
6 years ago my first son was killed in delivery due to an ostiopathic doctor putting a vacume extractor on the side of his head and attenpting to pull it through sideways. The damage caused a 3 inch fracture with exposed brain tissue. The DO/nursing staff all went quiet and pale as the nurse worked with the baby. In a deposition the doctor stated that he did nothing wrong and implied the nurse had dropped the baby. The autopsy stated the vaucume waHe also lied about the number of Pop offs by the vacume ectractor ..The nurses notes were honest. The hospital refused to provide the vacume extractor and many of the records to the state medical examiner due to instruction from their attorneys. Yes Doctors and hospitals have attorneys too.

I filed a complaint The State Ostiopathic board did nothing

I work for a 3 doctor, 2 PA family practice center. Our physicians spend as much time as they can with each patient, even if visits take 30 or 50 minutes if that is required. All of our patients are loyal and understand this, because they may need a problem that might just need an extensive visit. Our doctors even will make housecalls when necessary. They don’t worry about lawsuits that much, because of the rapport with our patients and the care we give. If we are presented with an extremely difficulty situation, we refer patients to specialists. Our senior doctor (age 76) will tell the patients “I am only Dr. _____ and not God” and then explain decisions for further testing or referrals. We always do follow up phonecalls, also. We do care.

Health Care REFORM starts in the GARDEN!
I know this is the last thing the medical professionals wish to hear but it is true in light of the social and economical quandry the world is facing concerning the costs of health care! The best way to reduce the costs now that we are in the midst of this mess is to indeed SAVE yourself and don’t get DEADsies! 64% of Americans are facing the nation with alot of costly baggage that will potentially bankrupt HMO’s and the socialized medicine theory. We better get healthy ourselves so we won’t NEED the skyrocketing facilities! Health problems tend to snowball all the while adding new problems the medication complications and reactions and well, as you mentioned the 98,000 hospital induced errors resulting in an unecessary DEATH! I know physicians began their journey into medical school with high hopes of helping people but soon into the practice they realize people just want a quick bandaid fix without taking any resposibility for there own health demise and then the hospital administrators turn things into a numbers game etc. NOW it seems it is time to put the burden of health care reform into the laps of the patient to get themselves healthy!.. THat will allow the industry to make more money again also! But there has to be an incentive for people to do so and part of it is telling them the TRUTH about how and where sickness and disease happens! Medicine is changing and staying healthy on your own will be the future

Good points doc but with all the changes coming up the pike people are going to have to get on board with the fact that Health Reform will begin in the GARDEN! There is little hope in socialized medicine and right now the insurance industry have things so out of reach financially for those without haealthcare we will have to just learn how to save OURSELVES and NOT get DEAD! How not to need the services that can snowball into more problems and end us up as one of those 98,000 hospital mistakes that result in untimely death! Which by the way are quite deserving of lawsuits!

One thing that would cure frivolous law suits would be a credible risk that the attorney who brought the frivolous suit could be sued (& have significant recovery) after the frivolous malpractice suit has been dismissed with prejudice —- meaning it can’t be revived.

Such a suit, presumably for abuse of official process, intentional infliction of emotional distress, possibly defamation,… has a very small chance of success unfortunately. There is a strong feeling in america that “everyone deserves his/her day in court”. And therefore success & recovery of significant monetary damages is unusual. The only instance where such a suit succeeded was an action brought against the orthopedist who treated a patient for fracture subsequent to a fall from a hospital gurney. The original malpractice action against the treating orthopedist was dropped literally on the court house steps, and the orthopedist won a damage award against the plaintiff’s lawyer. That one suit resulted in much increased caution by plaintiff’s lawyers throughout the state in bringin a suit.

Plaintiff’s lawyers turn a doctor’s life into living hell for years by filing a frivolous action. Justice requires nothing less than compensation for that living hell.

Oh, my. I court reported for 25 years as a technical reporter (which includes medical) in a state (Florida) where this was instituted. I will bet Mr. Cohn is not the world’s best doctor. What this system he espouses does is prevent people who are real victims of hospitals and doctors from being able to recover OR EVEN PUBLICIZE their victimization. That is what doctors want: nothing to ever be said about them and their practices. Doctors are so arrogant that one of them was removing people’s jawbones unnecessarily (saying they were malignant, lying about the lab results) knowing he would get away with it . . . in a Catholic hospital yet!
When lawyers are faced with this kind of thing, they just don’t practice medical plaintiff cases at all . . . which means the cases are worth less because the plaintiff, the insurance company knows, in that state will not be able to get a lawyer, never mind a doctor witness. The game is fixed anyway, even without the system Mr. Cohn so lusts over. So Mr. Cohn’s medical malpractice coverage is cheaper eventually, and Mr. Cohn does not have to be careful not to murder folks because he knows, as Dr. A. (the jawbone surgeon) knew, he will get away with “a little carelessness now and then.” Mr. Cohn is the reason I do not go to doctors, ever, for anything. I am over 65 and quite healthy, partly as a result of not taking the liver-destroying medicines these doctors get a kickback for prescribing.

You learn a lot court reporting.

Emily, If a doctor facing a frivolous suit can effictively bring a counterclaim AFTER the frivolous action has been disposed of with prejudice, what does that do to the victim of a valid claim? Answer: NOTHING. But the plaintiff’s bar needs to have a moment of pause before filing a frivolous action. The possibility of him/her being in the cross-hairs along with his client and any expert giving unfounded testimony will provide that moment of pause.

Folks who are the victims of legitimate claims will still file and win settlements or judgements. None of that will change. However 20% of claims where there is no evidence of malpractice result in payouts and 30% of claims in which there is little but some evidence of malpractice meet the same fate. That is a real problem for everyone who uses medical care in this country, including you, Miss Emily. The litigation lottery is a very inefficient tool for exacting justice, and that very justice calls out for the ability to turn the tables and even the score.