Are caps the answer to the malpractice crisis?
A physician and a lawyer debate the pros and cons.
Related posts:
- Should you become a military doctor?
- Resident work hours and sign-out
- Health courts
- Doctor as patient
- Physician blogging
- A balanced look at single-payer
- Tort reform: Where the candidates stand
KevinMD.com on Facebook
 
Follow on Twitter  
Subscribe





{ 1 comment }
From Ms. Doroshow’s side:
The way to reduce rates is through insurance reform. This is working in California, where residents passed Proposition 103, which lets consumers ask for a hearing for any rate increase above 15%Objection! Counsel is misrepresenting facts.
First, Prop 103 only applies applies to regulated medical malpractice insurance companies, which is only about half of the insureres for medical providers in California.
Second, no malpractice insurer has ever been denied a premium increase under Prop. 103. There’s not a lot of point in requesting a hearing if it’s not going to get heard.
For more info, check out what Califronia Physician has to say. about the myths of Prop 103.
I could go on pointing out flaws in the ambulance chaser’s arguments, but ultimately I’d rest my case the same point as Dr. Anderson: Caps aren’t the perfect solution to the crisis, but they still work.
Comments on this entry are closed.