Well, that’s not very helpful for patients. This is how the malpractice climate is affecting this neurosurgeon:
When voters told physicians, “Three strikes, you’re out,” Dr. Douglas Martin cautiously pulled back. He dropped his malpractice insurance and cut his practice to three half days a week.“The rest of the time, I trade stocks,” said Martin, a neurosurgeon for almost 30 years. “It’s actually more successful.”
Related posts:
- Do some doctors take on more risk than others?
- Expert witnesses are immune from defamation suits
- Texas malpractice reforms are working too well
- "Searching for a snowman in a blizzard"
- Stocks that benefit from obesity
- DIY neurosurgery
- Sued . . . for overtesting
KevinMD.com on Facebook
{ 11 comments }
from the (lousy ) article:
“Sam Stone, of Tequesta, had no idea how difficult it would be to find a neurosurgeon when his wife of 30 years, Mary, had a stroke in 2003. Eleven hours after she was diagnosed at Jupiter Medical Center, Mary Stone was sent to Shands at the University of Florida in Gainesville, nearly 260 miles away.
She died 10 days later at age 52. Sam Stone sued and recently settled with Jupiter Medical Center, though he and the hospital would not disclose the terms.
“I was totally ignorant of the situation before it happened,” said Stone, 61. “Even though I settled with the hospital, I’m still a little bit angry that the situation was allowed to occur in the first place and that it’s been allowed to continue.”
Clearly no details here (journalists aren’t capable of actually asking appropriate medically related questions), However,
1: Patient with a (presumable) head bleed has a delayed transfer to the academic mecca because no neurosurgeons around at this hospital who can take call anymore in the present legal climate of florida.
2: Patient dies.
3: Husband gets a settlement from hospital that did not have neurosurgeon and had to transfer because of “delay of care” because they had no neurosurgeon due to the legal climate in florida (notice the circular argument).
4: Husband is angry about the situation where neurosurgeons don’t practice because of a system that he (and other voters) instituted that states “three strikes and you lose your license (Does any moron have any ida how often high-risk specialities get sued?, three strikes ha, in twenty years Florida will be sending it’s head injury patient’s to Alabama as they will have lifted all the neurosurgeon licenses. Talk about a “delay” in care.). Thanks for reminding me that I will never, ever practice in Florida. Texas, here I come. you get what you pay for floridians.
It is disturbing that laws are usurping the authority of state medical boards, in this instance the authority to revoke a medical license on the basis of incompetence or negligence.
Passage of this law implies that citizens or lawmakers no longer trust physicians and surgeons to police their own in state medical boards staffed by physicians.
“Passage of this law implies that citizens or lawmakers no longer trust physicians and surgeons to police their own in state medical boards staffed by physicians.”
Passage of these laws (backed by Florida’s lawyers association) also imply that lay jurors and the public are competent to determine whether a neurosurgeon is competent to practice. Nothing like having jury’s comprised of the lowest common denominator determine whether doctor’s can keep their licenses (which is essentially is what is happening with the three strikes and your out law). I also will never set up shop in florida. You can have you rich, a$$hole, overly-litigous, retired new yorkers
Trusting providers (or any other group) for that manner to “police” themselves is doomed to failure from the start.
What percentage of the nation’s neurosurgeon’s have three judgments against them?
Do cases against neurosurgeon’s end with the surgeon being found at fault more often than other doctors?
Is the work such that any age related slowdowns impair the quality of your work —
Unless this fellow was independently wealthy I’d guess he got the capital to live off the stock market from his former profession, so I’m not sure this is such an injustice to him.
It doesn’t sound like the profession is doing such a great job of regulating itself!
Anon 1:37:
Certain specialties (surgery, OB, ER) involve more risk malpractice suits than others (IM, FP, Path). Hence the increased relative cost of malpractice insurance. Isn’t this patently obvious? It is also well studied in the literature if you want to look it up. Also, if you are a neurosurgeon taking ER call at the knife and gun club hospital your risk of a suit is higher than if you don’t take ER call and work at Mayo (hence once again the difference in relative rates of insurance). Again this is well studied that people often sue docs based on how well they know them or interact with them. Those “evil bastard” insurance companies take all of that into account when figuring out your insurance coverage. Think about it for a second. Now let’s proceed, if you are an altruistic neurosurgeon (many would say foolish) who takes ER call at knife and gun club ER X your relative risk of getting sued would be higher than at Mayo Jax (just an example). Three suits in a lifetime would be far from unexpected in any setting for neurosurgeons but especially here. So, altruistic neurosurgeon X takes ER call at knife and gun club ER and over time frame Y loses three malpractice suits. What does he get? he loses his license. Did the medical board determine he was incompetent? no. Three juries mostly made up of medical novices decided that he most likely committed malpractice. No involvement of the doctor’s peers or the bord in this decision. Maybe the doc is incompetent, maybe unlucky, either way what happens, neurosurgeons stop exposing themselves to liability in which they can lose their license (ie ER call). In the end the poor schmucks with head injury’s who go to the wrong ER without neurosurgery coverage lose with delayed care. With repect to the organization regulating itself, how would you know? Have you looked at florida’s medical board website? Or your own state? Or are you just speaking off the cuff? State medical boards do have variable rules, regulations, and thresholds for sanction, But you don’t appear to know what they are. A little knowldge is dangerous.
The article stinks. It leaves out a discussion about the three strikes law. The law was advanced by, who else, the trial lawyers. Why would the lawyers want such a law? Because their primary goal is to protect the public? Hardly – these are the same folks who conspired to keep secret the problems with Bridgestone tires in the 1990’s so that more plaintiffs would be generated. Although it might be the case that such a law would eliminate dangerous doctors, the more important effect is on how cases are defended. The law punishes doctors who are found liable by a jury, not those who settle a case before trial. This is exactly what the lawyers wanted. Trials are expensive and risky. Those damn doctors tend to win most of them. Better to blackmail them before trial with the threat that they might be risking their licenses. The goal of any med mal attorney is to force a settlement, not to go to trial. The people of Florida gave their lawyers a nice gift back in 2004. Now they are seeing the consequences.
Anonymous : 8:53 PM has it right.
The people of Florida have made a clear decision to drive neurosurgery out of business in their state. The “three strikes” law, the election of vile trial lawyers to public office, corrupt courts, endless jackpot justice lawsuits, etc.
Crooked Florida shysters killed the goose that laid the golden egg. The people of Florida strongly support the trial lawyers.
Floridians need to stop the whining and live with the consequences of their bad behavior.
If I understand correctly, the effect of the three strikes law is to revoke the license of any doctor with three judgements.
A revocation is reported to the National Practitioner Databank. You would lose your license in ALL states, even though other states have no such rule.
So three adverse judgements in Florida and your career is over.
In answer to Kevin’s question, stocks!
Neurosurgery requires knowledge, skill, and the more difficult the situation, the less you are compensated.
Stocks are more a game of darts and as long as you don’t leap from your window, nobody dies. Plus you just might get lucky and make much more than you deserve. With neurosurgery, the wager is whether you will be taken for much more than you deserve.
we’re all just a little bit evil. trial attorneys have simply taken the easier few little steps toward the wide downward sloping road to hell. who wouldn’t be tempted by easy money. we’re breaking apart really – whatever you can get away with. our president is our role model. can you imagine a president having sex with a child (bill clinton and monica lewinsky) and later berating the us citizenship for belaboring the point.
Comments on this entry are closed.