I was terminated by a physician group for reasons they never disclosed, although according to an administrative secretary and personal friend it had something to do with malpractice fears. I was devastated.

In fact, I was treated so harshly by their risk management attorney (imagine being pulled over and arrested by a police officer who never sees a need to tell you what you’ve done wrong)that I seriously considered quitting my job and moving out of state just to get away from the clinic’s incessant advertising about how wonderful and caring they are…all B.S.

The helpful advice given to me by the clinic? “Get over it.”

Sorry that some docs get unfairly accused, but it goes both ways.

Actually, we don’t know if those 13-16% were “close calls” even. But still, 84% correct is pretty good. Do you agree with your medical board’s assessment of cases 84-87% of the time? Reading Rangel, I’d bet not.

“This shows that lawyers have a nice chance to still get paid whether the suit has merit or not, so they don’t have any incentive to change the system.”

Assuming, as the insurers claim, that the average case costs $100K to try, and from the above, you have a 1 in 6 chance of getting a win on a case with no error or even close calls, and the average payout on those was what, $300K? That appears to be a net loser even at a 50% contingency fee.

Better check your numbers. I don’t know how you figure that’s a “nice ride”, but to me a negative cash flow isn’t that nice at all.

CJD

The study suggests that 13 to 16 percent of payouts go to suits not involving medical error. That doesn’t really count as “rare” in my book.

This shows that lawyers have a nice chance to still get paid whether the suit has merit or not, so they don’t have any incentive to change the system.

To be honest, if I were a lawyer, I wouldn’t want any change either. I wouldn’t want pre-screening panels to throw out non-meritous cases pre-trial, since that give zero chance of any payout. At least now, lawyers have a 13 to 16 percent chance of getting something for bringing non-meritous cases.

I don’t blame them one bit for wanting the status quo. The current system is a nice ride.

Thanks,
Kevin

The medical community needs to understand that it’s distressing to patients and families when there’s a bad outcome, and that people want to be talked to, not talked down to or avoided or ignored.

So who’s gonna take the first step here?

Someone on here posted awhile back about a health care injury but said he didn’t sue. He was promptly slammed for being self-righteous.

Damned if you do, damned if you don’t. Where’s it all gonna end??

Maybe I’m mistaken, but I think there’s a tendency in the medical profession to move further and further away from providing patients with any specific information about their cases LONG before any real indications of potential lawsuits come up.

I started paying attention to informed consent forms about six years ago after a lengthy series of minor surgeries. There was a place on the form for the surgeon to write in specific potential complications from the surgery that the patient should know about. My surgeon wrote “Continued problems” in that area. Wow, how informative.

I signed it partly because the doctor was standing over me with a pen, cap off, waiting to get the form back right that minute…partly because I wasn’t sure he’d do the surgery if I didn’t…and, I wasn’t expecting any problems, so why not?

It’s a strange environment that forces both doctors and patients to go through motions like that.