Should I Carry Malpractice (Liability) Insurance?

One thing I was told by my last employer about malpractice insurance was that you HAVE to disclose this fact to your employer. IF you are named in a suit against the hospital and the families lawyer finds out you have your own insurance they can then name you directly. I don't know if this was bogus or not, but why would you have to disclose to the hospital that you do carry insurance? So they can cut you loose if something happens? I haven't gotten any yet, but it's on my list to do along with joining my state's nurses's association.

I've been licensed for almost 25 years, in three different states, with more employers than I can count, and I've never heard this before (and I've never had an employer ask whether I had insurance). Attorneys will name you specifically in a suit if you are directly involved in an incident, regardless of whether or not you have insurance. (I've heard of suits being filed naming "Nurse A," "Nurse B," Nurse C," etc., before the attorneys even know which nurses, specifically, were involved -- they go back and fill in the names later). Your employer will cut you loose if they can find any justification whatsoever for doing so, regardless of whether you have your own insurance or not -- and if that happens and you don't already have your own coverage, you're just out of luck.

I thought it sounded fishy. No where on any application I've ever filled out is there a section asking whether you have your own liability insurance or not. I wasn't able to afford to get any when I was an LPN and I'm going to darn well make sure I can now.

Hello, WildcatFanRN,

With NSO, the discount rates apply to those in their 1st year after graduation, not licensure, so you will not be able to enjoy that benefit.



(fill out this quote to see above #7 question):

https://www.nso.com/quick-quote/page1.jsf

Ok...to clarify this for all of us. Do you mean that if we have functioned outside of our scope of practice or we have violated of SOC's or the hospitals policies then the nurse can be named and NOT covered under the hospitals malpractice coverage? Does that mean the hospital cant be held legally responsible finicially for any negligent actions of the nurse/MD/ etc etc etc? BC....if that is so then alot of the hospitals could not be held legally accountable for the malpractice actions of the nurse . And that isnt right either. I mean....if my child suffered an anoxic brain injury d/t a nurses negligence...or a doctors negligence that violated SOC's then that lets the hospital off scot free....or does it? SEe this is where alot of nurses get confused. BC we always kinda think that all malpractice litigation has no factual premise. But in reality according to all kinds of studies like "To Err is Human ", and others,....the reality is that there are so many people each day that die d/t a medical or nursing error....and that very very few of those deaths / disabilities result in any type of legal action. I think one study said the number of pt deaths d/t medical and nsg error is the equivilant to a loaded /packed jumbo jet full of people crashing every day or every few days. And that is reality. So alot of healthcare personell are fearful of attaining malpractice insurance for fear that they will not be covered under their facilities malpractice insurance . So....to clarify are you saying if they violated the SOC's or P&P's for that facility that the nurse/MD is not covered under the facilities umbrella malpractice policy...or does it just POTENTIALLY give rise to the possibilty they could legally hang the nurse out to dry for their actions?