More tidbits from the ATLA president. The ignorance is worse than I thought:
And you talk about defensive medicine; one of the things that astonishes me is the extent to which people — and, unfortunately, the press — are willing to buy into these wild statement that are made. Have you ever gone to your doctor and had your doctor say, ‘You know, there’s a test that I probably ought to give you. I don’t think it’s necessary, but I’m afraid you’ll sue me if I don’t?’ And do you know anybody whose doctor has ever said anything like that to them? Or do you know anybody whose doctor has ever given them an unnecessary test?
Granted, defensive medicine is uncommonly phrased like that, although it does happen. Often, defensive tests are phrased like this: “I don’t think that your headache is anything to worry about, but ‘just to be on the safe side’ (or ‘just to be complete’, or ‘just so we’re not missing anything’), let’s do a CT scan to rule out a tumor.” Patients will then be appreciative your thoroughness and completeness. It’s really quite a positive-reinforcing phenomenon.
Mr. Suggs, there is an open invitation for you to read this blog. Open your eyes to reality, and perhaps you’ll sound less foolish in the future.
Related posts:
- Defensive medicine is aggressive
- Defensive medicine op-ed reaction
- Lawyer: "I want my doctor to use defensive medicine"
- Defensive medicine
- Defensive medicine in the ER
- Defensive medicine in the news
- Patient perceptions and defensive medicine
KevinMD.com on Facebook
{ 45 comments }
← Previous Comments
“Read for comprehension”
Show me your plan. Pithy sayings don’t constitute a plan.
It’s telling that any post about malpractice issues have doctors outraged and backing this or that proposal, all so insurers maybe hold the line on premiums, while meanwhile your reimbursements are dimished every year, something that has a clear effect on your bottom line.
Do you even know what the word pithy means?Doesn’t sound like it
pithy: Precisely meaningful; forceful and brief.
As far as plan there are alot of ideas even on this thread….if you bother to read them. But that’s not what your about anon./ You are about making one comment after another of minimal substance just to be devil’s advocate. That’s easy and you know it.
What’s your plan, Anon?
Your writing posting pattern is easy to follow on this site.
Interesting you post over and over again yet never have anything constructive to say.
OK I’ll bite
1: Suits being required to go through a panel of docs/and non docs first. Make this with teeth, not the Mass. or fomer Arizona model where if you don’t like the result it get’s ignored. Do it in such a way that patient’s who may have had an injury that lawyer’s won’t take due to the money get a hearing.
2: Getting rid of the present “expert opinion” model and requiring instate docs of the same specialty review cases and give opinions. Possibly senior docs on the way to retirement whose practice is slowing down.
3: Requiring health insurance company’s explain significant increases in premiums.
4: Require the federal government to make available the present VA computor system model on a national basis to minimize errors.
Do it in such a way that patient records are protected and give the “death penalty” to those insurance company’s that mess with this protection.
5: Institute a system of sanction or loser pays for those lawyer’s who repeatedly bring cases without merit. Make sure sanctions are readily available to the public on state bar websites.
6: Conversly, make sure board certification, malpractice cases (number of), and punitive board actions of docs are also readily available to the public on state medical websites. Arizona has a good model for those interested.
We can add more I am sure. The sad thing is if you talk to docs, many are willing to come halfway for a better system for all. Unfortuantely as ATLA head showed, the bar will not take one step. Notice how I never mentioned malpractice caps or violation of the 7th amendment.
I like your proposals. But I have a few questions.
1. Are you going to appoint advocates for those patients who can assist them in responding to the panel’s questions?
2. I agree
3. I agree
4. I agree
5. I agree
6. I agree
Why do you say ATLA won’t take steps? I realize you didn’t say caps, but your proposals haven’t made it very far in any legislature, have they? Physicians and their insurers have yet to offer a proposal in a legislature that doesn’t involve damage caps so why would you expect ATLA to meet halfway?
Be fair. Physicians have also proposed capping attorney fees for plaintiff’s (but not defense) counsel. It won’t reduce a verdict by a cent but is that even the point?
I’m digging the banter of the “for and against” reform. You can simplify the dabate by comparing the US experience to that of other countries. I know, I know we have the “best justice system in the world, blah, blah, blah”. Just spare me that, it don’t fly. Does the ATLA and the rest of the lawsuit industry really believe that doctors in the US are MANY time more negligent than doctors in Canada, UK, Japan or (take your pick… you get it)? Of course not. Well. there are MANY MORE lawsuits per physicians in the US than ALL of those countries (any country for that matter). Just answer the question, don’t obfuscate, redirect or quote the lame and not applicable I of Med “study”. The answers are simply loser pay, or special medical courts. I’m a cardiologist. Before we passed a tort reform constitutional amendment in my state, I spoke with attorneys on many occasions. I offered UNLIMITED liability,no caps, no gimmicks, in exchange for loser pays…. like every other advanced legal system in the world upholds. they would take anything else before that. If you have a great case, you shouldn’t have to worry about it. After reform (caps) were passed, lawsuit filings are down in my area by 90%. Have the doctors suddenly gotten better? Do the caps dissuade lawyers from taking “less lucrative” cases? If so, what about all those people that need “justice” :>)
You think defensive medicine is a myth? I order tests to CMAss DAILY! I know they’ll be more than likely negative. I need to protect myself. The ER docs are even more suit conscious. This is why a trip to the ERfor a headache will cost you 5-10K.
We simply aren’t fooled any more by the bogus “little guy” champion the lawyers keep preaching. It’s just too lame.
Shockly
If you haven’t figured out that universal healthcare in other countries is why there are fewer malpractice claims, then you’re not very informed.
Your state lawsuit filings are down because they filed many cases that would normally be getting filed now before the cap went into effect, even if they were going to settle. That large a reduction has nothing to do with the reforms.
You have made it harder for people without economic loss to find lawyers who can afford to take their case, though. Congratulations. I hope you feel like a big winner.
“If you haven’t figured out that universal healthcare in other countries is why there are fewer malpractice claims, then you’re not very informed.”
Fell free to show data that supports that statement.
Data that most other first world countries have universal health care? Really?
What’s the bulk of most malpractice awards? Medical bills, past and future. If you don’t have medical bills to worry about and your welfare system is fairly significant so your standard of living isn’t completely hitting bottom like in the US, why would you go to the trouble and ordeal of filing suit?
There is no data as to WHY people file fewer suits. They don’t poll people who don’t file. And since we don’t even track the number of malpractice suits in the US, it’s impossible to say.
You didn’t elaborate on any data that supports those countries with Universal Care have fewer suits. Samson in Norway has stated that the ease in filing claims results in increased claims (granted this is not quite the same as filing a “lawsuit” but it appears that is not something that can be readily done in Norway). He doesn’t give supporting evidence either. Without supporting evidence all you are providing is your opinion.
What I don’t understand is why medical schools are turning out all these young physicians with the idea that it’s not just good but expected of them to practice defensive medicine.
Dr. Kevin has only been in practice a couple years and he can talk nothing except malpractice and defensive medicine. That tells me he hasn’t been in medicine long enough to be burned out to the point of just not caring anymore.
He is still very much, I would think, under the influence of his training. so, why are doc’s being trained in this fashion?
It’s almost like you are being taught (brainwashed) to believe you have no self-worth and your education can’t be trusted. That you can’t rely on what you know to make proper diagnosis. There is a big difference between the experienced Doc’s and the newer ones.
Why are you not being taught how to have faith and trust your judgement as a physician? Do you learn any hands on at all? Is it just order every test you can think of and send to every specialist available?
Why is med school teaching everyone to distrust the public so completely?
One more question, why do you think the way you practice doesn’t effect negatively the health care crisis in this country? When you order all these high priced tests and procedures that you know are worthless what are you doing to the ins. companies, and to people’s out of pocket? You are surely adding more than your share of problems to a system that you repeatedly tell us is so broken. If ordering tests, refering to specialists, and having procedures done is what you call being a physician now then maybe the NPs and PAs can do your jobs!
“You didn’t elaborate on any data that supports those countries with Universal Care have fewer suits.”
That was your claim, not mine. The “claims” in Norway may well be the equivalent of “lawsuits” here. But you can’t give a straight across comparison of nations with very different situations in terms of how their legal systems operate and how health care is delivered.
Anon 10:30:
Your statement on 10:40
“If you haven’t figured out that universal healthcare in other countries is why there are fewer malpractice claims, then you’re not very informed.”
I am not being argumentative. I simply have never heard of any study that correlates universal care with claim number (the word “lawsuit” would probably not be analogous given differnce in countries legal systems). Feel free to elaborate.
It’s simple common sense. Again, the bulk of most awards in our system our medical bills. Take out the medical bills and why would 90% of the people go through the ordeal? Why would any plaintiff’s lawyer take the case?
Plus, some of those systems have no-fault compensation akin to our workers’ comp system. So again, no need to file a claim.
“It’s simple common sense”
Oh come now. Depending on the country, filing a claim maybe little more than filling out paperwork without the need to get a legal person involved at all. Do you honestly think you can say “it’s common sense” without any comparison data at all is appropriate?
It is common sense because he said so. This joker is not interested in figuring out relative malpractice rates and how they compare with ease of filing a claim and Universal care availability. he interested in playing perpetual devi’s advocate. Trust me, he will be all about “give me the evidence” when it supports his arguement..
There are no “relative malpractice rates” because private insurers aren’t paying the victim’s bill, the govt. is. There is nothing remotely relative about them at all. Which is why your comparisons to foreign countries are idiotic.
Oh come now do your really believe your own garbage. This may come as a shock to you but human beings are made and “fixed” the same way whether it be in the USA, Norway, or Brazil even if the legal systems are different. Just because in Norway the gov. picks up the majority of the claim while in the US it is individual insurance doesn’t mean you can’t figure out relative rates of claims (excuse the double negative).
By the way I though anon 7:35 had some excellent ideas on changing the status quo. Interesting how nobody really picked up on it.
← Previous Comments
Comments on this entry are closed.