Med-Mal Reform -- Write your Senator

TheLemur · Apr 27, 2006

How can you say that a cap of $250,000 would not be an injustice?
My son or daughter who has no economic damages (lost wages) but just pain and suffering would not be justly compensated if they were in an accident which caused them to be completely and permanently incapacitated or died by medical error with just $250,000. Your suggestion is absurd!

So what is the fair monetary price for incapacitating injury or death? Is there an actual dollar value to these things?

Secondly, it is us, citizens, as jurors who decide cases. Our system presumes that we, the people, must decide whether a case is frivolous or whether a person is entitled to damages and how much. It is not lawyers who make these decisions. We have the authority and power as jurors to say no to frivolous suits as jurors. Society doesn't need law-makers who have not listened to the facts of the case to render a cap of $250,000 for a person's pain and suffering. This authority should be left up to us as citizens as jurors.
Lndcrsr2000

I've merely scanned this thread as I have little interest in legalese, but I believe that it has already been stated that most of these B.S. lawsuits are settled, meaning, unless I am totally mistaken: NO JURY. Just a slightly richer plaintiff, a much poorer and embarassed defendent, and a lawyer laughing all the way to the bank.

jwk · Apr 27, 2006

How can you say that a cap of $250,000 would not be an injustice?
My son or daughter who has no economic damages (lost wages) but just pain and suffering would not be justly compensated if they were in an accident which caused them to be completely and permanently incapacitated or died by medical error with just $250,000. Your suggestion is absurd!
Lndcrsr2000

If your son or daughter is truly incapacitated due to an injury or medical malpractice, there are plenty of economic damages, even if they are a minor. You obviously are clueless about how the law works and are dealing only with your emotional side here. I'm sure their life is priceless, but honestly, there is not enough money in the world to bring them back if they die or to fully restore them if they suffer catastrophic injury.

After EVERYTHING is paid for, absolutely everything, including any and all future costs of caring for them, how much is enough? Really. One milllion? Two million? OK, Five million is enough? Great. What about $4.9M? Do I hear $4.8M?

The McDonald's hot coffee verdict is just an example of how absurd the system has become. Jurors think "oh, it's a big company - they can afford it". And guess who pays? You and I do, through higher prices. It doesn't hurt the company - it hurts the consumer, you and me. Oh right, doctors can't charge more because they already have to accept pennies on the dollar from many managed care plans. What happens then? They close up shop and move - or retire early. You don't think that's a problem? There are plenty of rural and not so rural counties where OB docs no longer practice. They could make money there IF they didn't have to pay so much towards malpractice insurance. Or even better, they end up working for an HMO - lots harder to sue thanks to government favors - and often crappy quality of healthcare to go with it.

Juries are just not that smart - they are composed largely of people that were too stupid to get off of jury duty (be honest, spare me the civic responsibility crap). Plaintiff's lawyers in civil cases and defense lawyers in criminal cases DON'T want intelligent jurors - they want people they can manipulate to their way of thinking, regardless of the facts. The OJ trial is the classic example.

rayman · Apr 27, 2006

Excellent post, JWK! You bring out many good points. There are so many OB docs not delivering just because of insurance. Think of the thousands of lawsuits that get filed every year because as you said "they are a big company they can afford it". There are tons of people that go to these places just trying to find a lawsuit. About eight years ago I was on jury duty, didn't want to get out of it. By the end I had had enough. There was a case dealing with a shoulder injury from a MVA. I just said I was a RN and the plaintiff's attorney said thank you, you may leave. He knew. You're right.

London88 · Apr 28, 2006

I guess we can rely on the jurors because they know what all the medical terminology means and they know exactly how each surgical procedure is done. Yeah right! Like mentioned above they are simply not smart enough to be excused.

SharonH, RN · Apr 30, 2006

If your son or daughter is truly incapacitated due to an injury or medical malpractice, there are plenty of economic damages, even if they are a minor. You obviously are clueless about how the law works and are dealing only with your emotional side here. I'm sure their life is priceless, but honestly, there is not enough money in the world to bring them back if they die or to fully restore them if they suffer catastrophic injury.
After EVERYTHING is paid for, absolutely everything, including any and all future costs of caring for them, how much is enough? Really. One milllion? Two million? OK, Five million is enough? Great. What about $4.9M? Do I hear $4.8M?
The McDonald's hot coffee verdict is just an example of how absurd the system has become. Jurors think "oh, it's a big company - they can afford it". And guess who pays? You and I do, through higher prices. It doesn't hurt the company - it hurts the consumer, you and me. Oh right, doctors can't charge more because they already have to accept pennies on the dollar from many managed care plans. What happens then? They close up shop and move - or retire early. You don't think that's a problem? There are plenty of rural and not so rural counties where OB docs no longer practice. They could make money there IF they didn't have to pay so much towards malpractice insurance. Or even better, they end up working for an HMO - lots harder to sue thanks to government favors - and often crappy quality of healthcare to go with it.
Juries are just not that smart - they are composed largely of people that were too stupid to get off of jury duty (be honest, spare me the civic responsibility crap). Plaintiff's lawyers in civil cases and defense lawyers in criminal cases DON'T want intelligent jurors - they want people they can manipulate to their way of thinking, regardless of the facts. The OJ trial is the classic example.

Every time a discussion of large jury awards comes up, somebody pulls the McDonald's hot coffee verdict out of their butt. Why don't you list the actual facts of the case?

1. The coffee was not hot, it was scalding. Why would anyone serve scalding hot coffee?

2. McDonald's KNEW their coffee was unsafe because they had received hundreds and hundreds of complaints from previous burn victims. In some cases, McDonald's employees themselves were the ones buring customers when they spilled the scalding hot coffee. They KNEW it was unsafe but still they did nothing about it. That was corporate arrogance and they needed to be taught a lesson for that.

3. Despite all that, the old lady in that case did not receive nearly as much money as I have read some people claim. In fact, her verdict for damages was reduced considerably and she got less than $500,000 for McDonald's arrogance and negligence. How much $$$$ does McDonald's make a day from selling coffee alone?

As for dumb people serving on juries, if you are called for jury duty it is your legal duty to serve. The difference between not doing your legal duty and not doing your civic duty is jail time in case you didn't know. I think it's pretty smart to try to avoid that.

Also, it has not been proven that large malpractice awards are the sole cause of rising insurance costs. As a matter of fact, it has been found that insurance companies lost a lot of money in investments so guess where they made up the difference?

Finally, why not reduce patient errors and improve safety if you want to reduce large jury malpractice awards instead of trying to victimize the poor patient you already fouled up on once again by preventing them from getting damages?

rayman · Apr 30, 2006

How about we put this in perspective. This is not med-mal but is the same principle. Obviously, I have to be as general as possible so as not to breech some confidentiality something or other. Several years ago, a family was driving down an interstate in one of these 50 united states. The state highway dept. had tractors in the median mowing as they usually due. Just as the car comes by something flies out from under the mower, hits the car, goes through the glass and hits the young kid in the head. Horrible, tragic, wouldn't want this to happen to anyone. Kids ok, relatively speaking. Has some neuro deficits, had to have several surgeries. He is alive and very functional...plays, swims, etc, but is not completely "normal". Family sues the state and wins millions$$$. We think cool, good for the kid. They live in my hood. Nice family. Nobody works, got the most badass swimming pool in the hood, nice house, big expensive wrought iron fence around the back; get new cars ($$) every year. Guess that new Tahoe and Corvette dad is driving is really helping to relieve the pain and suffering? :eek: Oh, and if anybody is thinking pool = rehab....badass curvy water slide on it...therapeutic tax dollars.

jwk · Apr 30, 2006

Every time a discussion of large jury awards comes up, somebody pulls the McDonald's hot coffee verdict out of their butt. Why don't you list the actual facts of the case?
1. The coffee was not hot, it was scalding. Why would anyone serve scalding hot coffee?
2. McDonald's KNEW their coffee was unsafe because they had received hundreds and hundreds of complaints from previous burn victims. In some cases, McDonald's employees themselves were the ones buring customers when they spilled the scalding hot coffee. They KNEW it was unsafe but still they did nothing about it. That was corporate arrogance and they needed to be taught a lesson for that.
3. Despite all that, the old lady in that case did not receive nearly as much money as I have read some people claim. In fact, her verdict for damages was reduced considerably and she got less than $500,000 for McDonald's arrogance and negligence. How much $$$$ does McDonald's make a day from selling coffee alone?
As for dumb people serving on juries, if you are called for jury duty it is your legal duty to serve. The difference between not doing your legal duty and not doing your civic duty is jail time in case you didn't know. I think it's pretty smart to try to avoid that.
Also, it has not been proven that large malpractice awards are the sole cause of rising insurance costs. As a matter of fact, it has been found that insurance companies lost a lot of money in investments so guess where they made up the difference?
Finally, why not reduce patient errors and improve safety if you want to reduce large jury malpractice awards instead of trying to victimize the poor patient you already fouled up on once again by preventing them from getting damages?

OK - let's review how coffee is made - whether a drip coffeemaker or the old-fashioned percolator, the water is heated to a BOILING POINT, then dripped through the coffee grounds, making HOT COFFEE. No real rocket science there - it shouldn't need to be like the numerous Mexican restaurants that always tell you "THE PLATE IS HOT". It's just kind of a given. I'm not a coffee drinker - but most people, as I understand the concept, drink it HOT. I'm not aware of any room-temp coffee drinkers, or maybe lukewarm (although there are some frozen coffee afficianados I'm sure).

As far as the old lady at McDonalds - kinda stupid to sit the coffee in your lap as you're driving. And yes, the award was later reduced, but THE JURY award was for MILLIONS of dollars. And let's guess how much the LEGAL COSTS were? Probably significantly higher than whatever the award ended up being. And who pays those costs?

As far as being CALLED to serve on jury duty - I've been five times in the last 13 years in Fulton County, YOUR county SharonH, RN. I go and do my civic duty by showing up - I don't skip it. However, I have basically sat on my ass for 7 days out of work and did NOTHING. I sit through voir dire until they get to me. "OH, you're in the healthcare field? You're EXCUSED". Why would an intelligent person be excused? Because they're intelligent. Because attorneys don't like health care professionals in drug cases. Because they don't like people who can't be manipulated easily.

Good examples from my last jury experience. The two people who whined the most about serving on the jury got stuck on the jury. Why? Because the defense attorney turned their answers around about why they couldn't serve. If they has stuck to their very legitimate reasons about why they really shouldn't serve, they would have gotten off. They really didn't want to be there - they had good reasons to get off - but the attorney was able to figure out that they could be easily manipulated, so he wanted to keep them.

Malpractice companies are required BY LAW to maintain adequate reserves for payments. They don't set those reserve amounts - the state does. Many of these companies are non-profit, including a large physician-owned company in Georgia. Premiums are based on an assessment of RISK, just like your auto, home, life, health, and disability insurance. Sure the insurance companies invest that money. Why? To try to keep premium costs lower. If the money just sat there, premiums would be even higher. Thank God the GA legislature was finally controlled by Republicans last year and got some decent tort reform passed.

Malpractice claims need to be filed for true malpractice, not every complication that is known in advance to be possible. Patients will still try and sue for a chipped tooth or broken bridge from a difficult intubation. I guess they would rather of had us let them DIE for lack of an airway than chip a tooth. They'll sue because their facelift doesn't heal well, even though they told the plastic surgeon they quit smoking months ago but didn't. They'll sue because their cancer wasn't diagnosed on a timely basis, even though they didn't followup with their physician as instructed because they were afraid that if they did, OMG, they might have cancer.

Reduce medical errors? Fine. Excellent idea. Tell me how we do that. Tell me how to stop a nurse from giving maalox through a central line in an ICU patient 20 years ago (this was before propofol - there were NO OTHER white medicines available then except antacids and barium). Yes there are plenty of preventable errors made. There are also unpreventable and unforseen complications as well that no amound of JCAHO standards will stop. There was an article out just this past week that many of the wrong-side surgical procedures that have occurred would not have been prevented even if all the current JCAHO standards had been followed.

As the saying goes, SH*T HAPPPENS - it's not always preventable, and suing because of it is not always the right thing to do.

MmacFN · Apr 30, 2006

Hi sharon

I think jwk covered all the bases, but let me just add one thing.

When i was living in canada going to school i worked at Tim Hortons. Its a place similar to Dunkin Doughnuts here. We served ALOT of coffee which was VERY hot (i spilled enough on myself to know). Here is the difference between Canada and the USA when it comes to how incidents, like the macdonalds one, are handled.

I had a customer buy a LARGE coffee. It was hot as hell. He took the coffee out to his car, where, on placing it on his roof it tipped over and ran down his head while getting something off the seat. Was it hot, yes. Was it scalding, apparently so he went to the ER. Was he an idiot? Absolutely. It seems common practice in the USA (from a legal standpoint) to blame everything on everyone else but the person responsible. Case in point are all the schools that have a "no student fails" policy. The schools are afraid the parents will sue if its found out their kid is a disruptive idiot who cant add so is held back a year. Instead, its common practice (at least here in AZ) to pass these morons to the next grade to the detriment of all the students who actually try. Its pathetic.

You know what we did for that guy at Tim Hortons? When he came back in we gave him another coffee on the house.

Every time a discussion of large jury awards comes up, somebody pulls the McDonald's hot coffee verdict out of their butt. Why don't you list the actual facts of the case?
1. The coffee was not hot, it was scalding. Why would anyone serve scalding hot coffee?
2. McDonald's KNEW their coffee was unsafe because they had received hundreds and hundreds of complaints from previous burn victims. In some cases, McDonald's employees themselves were the ones buring customers when they spilled the scalding hot coffee. They KNEW it was unsafe but still they did nothing about it. That was corporate arrogance and they needed to be taught a lesson for that.
3. Despite all that, the old lady in that case did not receive nearly as much money as I have read some people claim. In fact, her verdict for damages was reduced considerably and she got less than $500,000 for McDonald's arrogance and negligence. How much $$$$ does McDonald's make a day from selling coffee alone?
As for dumb people serving on juries, if you are called for jury duty it is your legal duty to serve. The difference between not doing your legal duty and not doing your civic duty is jail time in case you didn't know. I think it's pretty smart to try to avoid that.
Also, it has not been proven that large malpractice awards are the sole cause of rising insurance costs. As a matter of fact, it has been found that insurance companies lost a lot of money in investments so guess where they made up the difference?
Finally, why not reduce patient errors and improve safety if you want to reduce large jury malpractice awards instead of trying to victimize the poor patient you already fouled up on once again by preventing them from getting damages?

jwk · Apr 30, 2006

Hi sharon
I think jwk covered all the bases, but let me just add one thing.
When i was living in canada going to school i worked at Tim Hortons. Its a place similar to Dunkin Doughnuts here. We served ALOT of coffee which was VERY hot (i spilled enough on myself to know). Here is the difference between Canada and the USA when it comes to how incidents, like the macdonalds one, are handled.
I had a customer buy a LARGE coffee. It was hot as hell. He took the coffee out to his car, where, on placing it on his roof it tipped over and ran down his head while getting something off the seat. Was it hot, yes. Was it scalding, apparently so he went to the ER. Was he an idiot? Absolutely. It seems common practice in the USA (from a legal standpoint) to blame everything on everyone else but the person responsible. Case in point are all the schools that have a "no student fails" policy. The schools are afraid the parents will sue if its found out their kid is a disruptive idiot who cant add so is held back a year. Instead, its common practice (at least here in AZ) to pass these morons to the next grade to the detriment of all the students who actually try. Its pathetic.
You know what we did for that guy at Tim Hortons? When he came back in we gave him another coffee on the house.

Excellent point Mike - personal responsibility is too often a rare thing these days.

rayman · Apr 30, 2006

JWK & Mike...great posts! I have felt for a long time that one of the problems with society today is that most people don't want to take responsiblilty for themselves or their actions. Well said, gentlemen.

SharonH, RN · Apr 30, 2006

OK - let's review how coffee is made - whether a drip coffeemaker or the old-fashioned percolator, the water is heated to a BOILING POINT, then dripped through the coffee grounds, making HOT COFFEE. No real rocket science there - it shouldn't need to be like the numerous Mexican restaurants that always tell you "THE PLATE IS HOT". It's just kind of a given. I'm not a coffee drinker - but most people, as I understand the concept, drink it HOT. I'm not aware of any room-temp coffee drinkers, or maybe lukewarm (although there are some frozen coffee afficianados I'm sure).
As far as the old lady at McDonalds - kinda stupid to sit the coffee in your lap as you're driving. And yes, the award was later reduced, but THE JURY award was for MILLIONS of dollars. And let's guess how much the LEGAL COSTS were? Probably significantly higher than whatever the award ended up being. And who pays those costs?.

I don't drink a lot of coffee either but most people don't drink it hot enough to give them third degree burns, so it was not necessary to keep it that hot jwk; that's the point. If it will burn your leg, then it will burn your tongue and throat. Who drinks coffee that hot??? And once again, McDonald's had been warned hundreds of times about the dangerous temperature of their coffee. What is your response to that? The only people not taking responsibility in this case is McDonald's.

Oh and one more thing, you continue to be confused on the facts of that case. The lady in question was not driving. The car was not moving. They were stopped and when she removed the lid on her coffee, some of it spilled. That's the danger in trying to second guess juries in this case when you are not hearing all the facts.

As far as being CALLED to serve on jury duty - I've been five times in the last 13 years in Fulton County, YOUR county SharonH, RN. I go and do my civic duty by showing up - I don't skip it. However, I have basically sat on my ass for 7 days out of work and did NOTHING. I sit through voir dire until they get to me. "OH, you're in the healthcare field? You're EXCUSED". Why would an intelligent person be excused? Because they're intelligent. Because attorneys don't like health care professionals in drug cases. Because they don't like people who can't be manipulated easily..

??? It sounds to me like you were excused because you are a healthcare professional, not because you are intelligent. That's one heck of an extrapolation you made.

Good examples from my last jury experience. The two people who whined the most about serving on the jury got stuck on the jury. Why? Because the defense attorney turned their answers around about why they couldn't serve. If they has stuck to their very legitimate reasons about why they really shouldn't serve, they would have gotten off. They really didn't want to be there - they had good reasons to get off - but the attorney was able to figure out that they could be easily manipulated, so he wanted to keep them..

That's a whole of guessing on your part.

Malpractice companies are required BY LAW to maintain adequate reserves for payments. They don't set those reserve amounts - the state does. Many of these companies are non-profit, including a large physician-owned company in Georgia. Premiums are based on an assessment of RISK, just like your auto, home, life, health, and disability insurance. Sure the insurance companies invest that money. Why? To try to keep premium costs lower. If the money just sat there, premiums would be even higher. Thank God the GA legislature was finally controlled by Republicans last year and got some decent tort reform passed.

Yeah, it is one of the most ignorant and mean-spirited laws around, like a lot of the laws the GOB (good ole boys) legislature passed. One section of that tort reform law has already been struck down because it was unconstitutional.

Malpractice claims need to be filed for true malpractice, not every complication that is known in advance to be possible. Patients will still try and sue for a chipped tooth or broken bridge from a difficult intubation. I guess they would rather of had us let them DIE for lack of an airway than chip a tooth. They'll sue because their facelift doesn't heal well, even though they told the plastic surgeon they quit smoking months ago but didn't. They'll sue because their cancer wasn't diagnosed on a timely basis, even though they didn't followup with their physician as instructed because they were afraid that if they did, OMG, they might have cancer.
Reduce medical errors? Fine. Excellent idea. Tell me how we do that. Tell me how to stop a nurse from giving maalox through a central line in an ICU patient 20 years ago (this was before propofol - there were NO OTHER white medicines available then except antacids and barium). Yes there are plenty of preventable errors made. There are also unpreventable and unforseen complications as well that no amound of JCAHO standards will stop. There was an article out just this past week that many of the wrong-side surgical procedures that have occurred would not have been prevented even if all the current JCAHO standards had been followed.
As the saying goes, SH*T HAPPPENS - it's not always preventable, and suing because of it is not always the right thing to do.

I don't dare argue that there are not a lot of frivolous lawsuits. I have had people walk in the door threatening to sue over water on the floor and because they didn't get their meal on time. But by and large, the nuisance lawsuits are settled out of court which cheeses me off. It's not fair that the ones with merit are punished.

SharonH, RN · Apr 30, 2006

How about we put this in perspective. This is not med-mal but is the same principle. Obviously, I have to be as general as possible so as not to breech some confidentiality something or other. Several years ago, a family was driving down an interstate in one of these 50 united states. The state highway dept. had tractors in the median mowing as they usually due. Just as the car comes by something flies out from under the mower, hits the car, goes through the glass and hits the young kid in the head. Horrible, tragic, wouldn't want this to happen to anyone. Kids ok, relatively speaking. Has some neuro deficits, had to have several surgeries. He is alive and very functional...plays, swims, etc, but is not completely "normal". Family sues the state and wins millions$$$. We think cool, good for the kid. They live in my hood. Nice family. Nobody works, got the most badass swimming pool in the hood, nice house, big expensive wrought iron fence around the back; get new cars ($$) every year. Guess that new Tahoe and Corvette dad is driving is really helping to relieve the pain and suffering? Oh, and if anybody is thinking pool = rehab....badass curvy water slide on it...therapeutic tax dollars.

How's this for perspective?

1. 98,000 preventable deaths due to medical errors every year. Only about 15% of those injured ever sue.

2. Physicians only ~ 3% of their practice earnings on medical malpractice insurance as compared to over 50% for their salary. That's some "crisis".

3. Only 5% of doctors account for >50% of malpractice payouts. But you think the solution is to punish the victims instead of aggressively going after incompetent healthcare providers?

4. I don't know about anywhere else, but in Georgia there has been no mass exodus of physicians due to high malpractice insurance. In fact there are more practicing physicians in this state than ever.

There's your perspective.