If by “works” you mean inhibits the ability of housewives, the elderly, and children to find representation when they are injured by negligent parties because insurance lobbyists have arbitrarily set the value of their lives, then yes, you’re absolutely correct.

Go insurance industry!! See you during the next recession, doc, when another “crisis” develops. Talk about “believe what you want.”

Anything to avoid facing the fact that tort reform works, I suppose.

Maybe that’s why, maybe not. Maybe they got offered better jobs. Maybe they got divorced and wanted to get away from the ex. We don’t know because none of those allegedly leaving were interviewed. I don’t know how it works in your industry, but most others require some facts before reaching conclusions.

Ah, progress.

It would appear the obstetricians felt the “miniscule” risk was not worth it.

No one said it didn’t exist, they said it was miniscule. But I’ll tell you what, if you want me to indemnify you, send me your claims history to start and then I’ll interview you and I’ll price it for you. How much coverage do you want?

Not enough, evidently.

And what makes you think that $150K is a competitive figure for the level of responsibility and the hours demanded? What makes $150K “good?” Good for what? (I personally don’t think “six figures” gets “good” until it hits $700K.)

>>>”Not enough money not to abandon their patients?”

Relocating your practice is not abandonment, regardless whether there are convenient or available practitioners left in a given location. No one is guaranteed a right to availability of medical specialists, ever, anywhere. The departing doctor is not required to find his patients suitable alternative providers.

>>>”If such is the case then these folks need to have their privileges to practice revoked . . . “

That is laughable. Revoked by whom, the hospitals who can’t attract practitioners to work in the first place? Obviously you don’t work in professional recruitment.

>>>”and society at large needs to consider a system that is more attuned to putting the patients first over the pocketbooks of the providers.”

Privileges are not the right of freeloaders to bestow on those whose services they don’t wish to pay competitively to have (unless you have been elected to Congress, that is.)

What “system” do you have in mind there, slavery?

>>>”Providers failing to provide access to care are breaking the tacit agreement that allows their field to govern the supply of providers.”

Last I heard, fee still paid for service. That is how it works even in that wonderful world of “single payer.” What other “tacit” agreement are you referring to? Are you implying that there is some form of “tacit” agreement that doctors should have licenses (last I looked, I had to have one; no one asked my agreement.) Or are you implying that there is some sort of agreement that prohibits non-doctors from providing medical care? If you think that, don’t tell all the the podiatrists, dentists, oro-maxillo-facial surgeons, nurse midwives, nurse anaesthetists, nurse practitioners, licensed clinical psychologists, optometrists and chiropractors about that, they will be mighty upset. Or do you think the public is willing to accept care from anyone who can fog a glass without showing some ability to meet a standard of expertise? If you know that to be the case, please say where, because I don’t hear it where I work.

>>>”Either provide access to care or step aside (see the Missouri fight against midwives) and let those that actually care for patients provide care.”

Or something like that, until they discover that they are in over their heads, at which point, we return to the subject of this post.

No guarantee of indemnity for a risk that supposedly doesn’t exist (massive malpractice judgement).

Yet real quick to ask for guarantees himself.

Because if you’re going to scare people into thinking that lawyers ran off the docs, when you end the ability to hold your negligent self accountable for your actions, the patients are going to want SOMETHING back. Because apparently they now have a RIGHT to health care – specifically certain specialties, under your logic.