2

Click here to load reader

FEW PHYSICIANS, MANY CLAIMS

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

Page 1: FEW PHYSICIANS, MANY CLAIMS

FEW PHYSICIANS, MANY CLAIMSAuthor(s): Paul MarcotteSource: ABA Journal, Vol. 73, No. 10 (AUGUST 1, 1987), p. 47Published by: American Bar AssociationStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/20759441 .

Accessed: 17/06/2014 13:15

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

American Bar Association is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to ABA Journal.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 195.78.108.199 on Tue, 17 Jun 2014 13:15:24 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Page 2: FEW PHYSICIANS, MANY CLAIMS

FEW PHYSICIANS, MANY CLAIMS

A controversial study concludes that a small number of incompetent doctors in the Chicago area are re

sponsible for a large part of the mal practice lawsuits filed there.

A Chicago consulting group, Health Resources Inc., tracked 12,138 medical malpractice lawsuits filed from 1973 through 1986. It found that less than 2 percent of the physicians, a total of 503 doctors, were named as defendants in 36 percent of the suits.

Within this group, there were 188 doctors who were sued a minimum of 10 times and a maximum of 36 times.

About half of the group were sued in conjunction with hospitals that do not have accredited graduate medical training programs. Less than 1 per cent of these frequently sued doctors maintained practices at university medical centers.

The report stated: "While excel lent orthopedists, neurosurgeons and obstetricians may be sued, they ap pear as defendants much less fre quently and, when sued, complaints rarely allege the gross breaches of care that result in multimillion dollar verdicts and settlements.

"[R]ather than the highly spec ialized tertiary care physicians, those

who are most frequently sued, re

gardless of specialty certification, are often involved in all facets of medical and surgical care.

"In too many instances, these physicians have performed highly technical gynecological, cardiovas cular, orthopedic and neurological surgery, without benefit of graduate

medical training in all of these areas, giving new meaning to the concept of high-risk."

The report also found that when this group was sued, it was more

likely that other doctors and the hos pitals were named as co-defendants. These suits also more frequently stemmed from the death of the pa tient.

"Based upon the information de tailed in the study data, it appears that a substantial portion of the per ceived problem of medical malprac tice is a crisis of negligence rather than one of litigation," the study con cluded.

Natalie Miller, one of the study's

authors, said, "Being sued doesn't mean you're a bad doctor, but when you find people who are getting sued 20 or 30 times, you've got to stop and look at what's going on." She said Il linois was doing an inadequate job of policing incompetent doctors.

The president of the Illinois Medical Society, Dr. Jere Freidheim, however, disputes the study's conclu sions. Freidheim said the fact that a small minority of doctors are sued

more than once is meaningless. "Were those .physicians actually

convicted of medical negligence?

Over 80 percent of malpractice law suits are closed without any payment to the plaintiff. Many good physi cians are sued several times over the course of their careers because they take on tough, high-risk referrals and emergency cases," said Freidheim.

In recent years, Illinois has strengthened its system of policing incompetent doctors by a number of

measures, including mandatory re porting to state authorities of all medical malpractice verdicts and set tlements, according to Freidheim.

?Paul Marcotte

END INSURANCE EXEMPTION? Bills would apply antitrust laws

A clamor for closer scrutiny of the insurance industry has led to congressional proposals to amend the McCarran-Ferguson Act to make fed eral antitrust laws applicable to in surance companies.

"The time is well past due for modification of McCarran-Fergu son," said Sen. Paul Simon, D-Ill., sponsor of one bill. "The public in terest is not served by exempting the insurance industry from federal an titrust law."

Speaking to lawyers attending the Tort and Insurance Practice Sec tion annual meeting in Washington in May, Simon said his bill would al low the industry to continue its joint collection of loss data, development and dissemination of policy forms and

A Sen. Paul Simon

participation in the pools and joint underwriting needed to cover large risks, like nuclear plants.

The Justice Department's Anti trust Division and much of the insur ance industry oppose the proposal, however. "The antitrust exemption of the McCarran Act is not responsi ble for causing the present crisis in certain lines of liability insurance, and its repeal will not solve the prob lem," said acting Assistant Attorney General Charles Rule.

Franklin Nutter, president of the Alliance of American Insurers in Schaumburg, 111., said regulating the insurance industry at the federal level

would likely mean "federal regula tion superimposed on state regula tion and a constant struggle for power."

Nutter said continued state reg ulation is more practical. "Over the years, state regulation of insurance has proven to be more responsive to local conditions and needs because it is closer to those requiring action. ... A 'solution' devised in Washington becomes a solution applied every where, even if local conditions do not warrant it."

Also, "the history of many fed eral agencies," said Nutter, "does not give rise to confidence that federal regulation would serve the consumer better. Federal banking regulation has not prevented bank failings, nor has federal securities regulation de terred insider trading."

?Nancy Blodgett

ABA JOURNAL / AUGUST 1, 1987 47

This content downloaded from 195.78.108.199 on Tue, 17 Jun 2014 13:15:24 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions