A commenter writes:
As far as physicians not wanting to criticize another physicians’ care, that might just be one of your biggest problems in this whole malpractice and increasing malpractice ins. rates. Doctors can’t have it all ways . . . there will be no resolve in this problem until physicians are willing to police their own. Until they are willing to get BAD doctors out of their profession then how can they have hope that this nightmare will go away.
I completely agree. However, as this recently discussed story proves – it is easier said than done. The tort process and continuing fear of litigation has proved to be a detriment to peer review, as RangelMD has written extensively about.
Related posts:
- NEJM on Medicare reimbursement: "No easy fix in sight"
- The overzealous jury, for the defense
- Mammograms before age 50
- West Virginia editorial: "Tort reform saved health care"
- Malpractice rates decline in Ohio
- Why Howard Dean is wrong on medical malpractice reform
- They make it sound so simple
KevinMD.com on Facebook
{ 1 comment }
I’ve always wondered why each state doesn’t have a review board that a suit must be submitted to before it can proceed any further. The board decides whether the case has merit or is just frivolous, and is then allow to litigate or be thrown out.
Comments on this entry are closed.