malpractice/liability insurance?

In my school we had to have insurance in order to attend the program. But all of that was included in the fees when I registered for the classes. But I have talked to so many nurses who think that liability insurance is just like asking for a lawsuit. They have told me that a nurse with the insurance will more likely get sued because the lawyer knows that they can get some money from you. I am not saying that this is true, but that is what I hear in several hospitals during my clinicals and at work.

My mom has been a nurse for 25+ years and she believes there's no reason to have insurance if you follow your hospitals policies and procedures. By doing that, your hospital will support you in a lawsuit. During my nursing orientation, that question was brought up (it was on many of our minds) and the administrator said the same thing. In a lawsuit, the hospital and the doctor are likely to be pegged, not the nurse. I was also told that a nurse is more likely to be drawn into a lawsuit if she has malpractice insurance.

There are numerous threads on this topic that you can access to read every possible opinion on the subject.

It is my personal opinion that anticipating representation and protection from one's employer in the event of a lawsuit is naive and borders on unprofessional.

If, in the course of your practice, you make an honest mistake that harms a patient, why shouldn't you provide appropriately for that patient's future needs by way of a monetary settlement? Isn't that exactly what we expect of our physician counterparts? Would you use the services of a physician who chose not to secure malpractice insurance as a means of protecting his/her patients?

The notion that a nurse will be named in a lawsuit only because s/he has personal liability insurance is equally absurd. At the time a suit is filed, the lawyers have no idea who has insurance. During discovery, names may be removed from the suit as it becomes clear whose actions were (and were not)directly related to the patient's negative outcome. If you were truly negligent, do you really think a lawyer will "excuse" you simply because you have no liability insurance. They will consider alternative ways of obtaining money from you to pay for their client's needs, such as garnishing wages, accessing your savings and investments, etc.

Lastly, no nurse always practices within institution policies and procedures. That is a loophole any savvy hospital attorney will use to place the blame on the nurse, rather than the institution. Do you file a written notice every time you work short staffed? Do you make out an incident report every time a drug is missing from your patient's supply, forcing you to give it late? Have you ever forgotten to check a patient's allergies prior to administering a medication? Have you ever gotten swamped and allowed more than an hour to go by without visualizing a patient's IV?

Please give this issue the serious consideration it is due!

The notion that a nurse will be named in a lawsuit only because s/he has personal liability insurance is equally absurd. At the time a suit is filed, the lawyers have no idea who has insurance. During discovery, names may be removed from the suit as it becomes clear whose actions were (and were not)directly related to the patient's negative outcome. If you were truly negligent, do you really think a lawyer will "excuse" you simply because you have no liability insurance. They will consider alternative ways of obtaining money from you to pay for their client's needs, such as garnishing wages, accessing your savings and investments, etc

Speaking as a claims adjuster from an insurance company for over 10 years (now a new nurse) I have to disagree with that statement and agree with others that yes, if you do have insurance they will be more likely to bring you into the suit although not the ONLY reason. If you are found to have done nothing wrong then no worries. Attorneys have an obligation to their clients to explore ALL avenues of recovery and deep pockets are big targets. But I also agree with the same poster that to NOT have insurance is just plain crazy.

People make honest mistakes. I also understand that the coverage helps protect your license. I don't know if the hospitals insurnace would put that as a priority when they are trying to protect themselves.

Hello, kk2000,

I would never think of practicing without liability insurance. And, I advise my students the same.

Check with www.nso.com

Wonderful rates and you can get a quote online.

I have my insurance through NSO. I wouldn't practice without it. It was strongly advised when I went through my LPN program and also my RN program.

Kelly

Being "named" in a lawsuit has little bearing upon whether or not you have personal liability insurance. As a nurse, being named in a suit is one way to insure that your employer is also liable as the responsible party. Thusly, your employer will immediately do all it can to be divorced by trying to prove you did not follow standard P/P ,etc., to avoid being liable.

Although trial attorneys are wising up to the fact that most nurses DO carry thier own insurance, and will take the "scattershot" approach in naming everyone they can remotely connect to the incident in the suit; this is in no way a reason to NOT have insurance.

Unless you have committed gross negligence, the jury is most often on your side. $85 a year is cheap for the voice it will bring you in a court of law.

Anyone can sue anyone; a lawsuit is no longer a badge of shame, it is the price of doing business in America. Don't hesitate to protect yourself from

disgruntled clients who think they should be paid because Grampa had a poor outcome.

what are the names of some of these insurance companies and which ones are the best ones in california?

Get it. ASAP.