From: alanj@endeavor18.tek.com (Alan Jeddeloh)
Newsgroups: pnw.general
Subject: Re: Trust Me - I'm from the Government to help you
Date: 25 Jan 93 23:13:52 GMT
Reply-To: Alan.Jeddeloh@tek.com
Distribution: na
Organization: Tektronix, Inc.


In article <1993Jan24.074207.14191@eskimo.com> nanook@eskimo.com (Robert Dinse) writes:
>In article <1586@nazgul.UUCP>, bright@nazgul.UUCP (Walter Bright) writes:
> ...

>     Major cost of health providers overhead is malpractice insurance.

> ...

>     Well, if the court system was fair, if frivilous law suits weren't
>common place, if verdicts were based on factual evidence rather than emotional
>considerations, then perhaps legitimate practitioners wouldn't need malpractice
>insurance, but right now that isn't the case.

Frivilous malpractive suits are not commonplace, contrary to the propaganda
from the insurance industry, AMA, and Dan Quail.  In a recent survey done
in an eastern state (Pennsylvania?) a medical group concluded that OVER 90%
of the jury findings in malpractice suits were justified.  Note that the
remaining less that 10% of the suits were not necessarily "frivolous", merely
that the MEDICAL group disagreed.  

The media is fond of reporting  multi-million dollar damage awards to dippy
ladies in California, they seldom if ever report that the dippy cases get
thown out on appeal.

>...

>     There needs to be reform in the court system.  There needs to be real
>substantial penalties associated with frivilous law suits, or those that are
>designed to transfer wealth as opposed to seeking compensation for damages.
>There needs to be larger penalties for scam artists faking injuries in an
>attempt to collect damages and there needs to be stiff penalties for any
>lawyer or anyone else who cooperates in such scams.

There are already restrictions to prevent filing frivilous suits.  In
Oregon, for example, one cannot file a suit without substantiated medical
opinion that there is cause to file the action.  Awards beyond documentable
economic damages (i.e. for "pain and suffering") are strictly limited.
Even so, it is easy in a malpractice case to ring up some astounding damages -
and those damages are for a large part based on past and projected future
MEDICAL costs.

Two of the most expensive areas for malpractice insurance are obstetrics and 
anesthesiology.  The reason these are areas are so expensive is that these
are the areas where it more likely to do profound, permanent and irreparable
harm to an individual.  Parinatal hypoxia can cause blindness, deafness,
cerebral palsey, developmental disabilities, and mental retardation.  Such
brain damage can and has resulted in infants left in a Permanent Vegitative
State.  (The "Baby Doe" laws left by the Reagan administration prevent parents
from having a baby, EVEN WITH FLAT EEG's, from being removed from a respirator).

A child damaged at birth faces a lifetime of special medical needs and reduced
or nonexistant earnings.  Skilled nursing care can cost $50,000 - $75,000, and
is rarely covered by medical insurance.  Even a child with only slight damage
will find it difficult or impossible to get insurance coverage -- it becomes one
of the "prexisting conditions" insurance companies are so fond of not covering.
(If the child is covered by the parent's insurance, and the parents change jobs,
guess what happens???)  As a result, the parents of such a child *have no
choise* but to sue to provide for their child's future care.

I know of one case a couple years ago in Portland against Kaiser.  A woman
went into premature labor somewhere around 23 weeks gestation.  According
to the suit, the hospital did not attempt to stop labor.  Twin girls were
born, one of whom did not survive, the other suffered major brain damage.
The girl was left blind, deaf and dumb, a quadriplegic, with cerebral palsey,
and is severly mentally retarded.  She is able to smile and likes to be held
and rocked.  She will need skilled nursing care for the rest of her natural
life, such as it is.  The mediated award (3-member mediation team) was over 4
million dollars. 

(While we're on the subject, I might point out that the actual cost to the
insurer in such cases is that of a specially structured annuity, designed
to pay out a fixed amount, increasing with inflation, over the expected 
life of the child.)

--
    Alan Jeddeloh      W:(503) 685-2991  H:(503) 292-9740
    Tektronix, Inc.; D/S 60-850; PO Box 1000; Wilsonville, OR 97070
    Alan.Jeddeloh@tek.com 
    You can put the children to bed, but you can't make them sleep!