Home  Learn More  Take Action  Schools  Healthcare  Society
     


News and Commentary
MedWatch
CG In The News
Events
Recommended Reading
CG Publications
Op-Eds
Polls
Speeches
Resource Binders
Fact Sheets
Other Sources
Booklist
Links
Reports & Studies


Make a tax-deductible contribution. Common Good needs your support.

Let us know what you think (or update your information).

Does America Need A New System Of Medical Justice?

April 24, 2002

Location: AEI-Brookings Joint Center for Regulatory Studies, Washington, DC

Here is a summary of the presentations that were given at the first Common Good Forum, "Beyond Patients' Rights: Do We Need a New System of Medical Justice," hosted by the AEI/Brookings Joint Center for Regulatory Studies in Washington DC on April 24, 2002.

After a welcome and introduction by Robert Hahn and Rober Litan, co-directors of the Joint Center, Philip Howard framed the discussion, advancing the idea that America needs a new system of medical justice--one that completely restructures the relationship between healthcare and the legal system, between patients, physicians, and attorneys. (Philip Howard's remarks are available through the box at the right.)

Alain Enthoven characterized the current medical justice system as "legal terrorism" conducted against doctors and health plans by certain plaintiffs' attorney--and that the real losers are the patients who must bear rapidly increasing healthcare costs. In California, health insurance premiums are increasing 25% each year, owing to class action lawsuits and doctors practicing "defensive medicine" in order to protect themselves against legal liability. Professor Enthoven asserted that "the problem of course is that my right, and the right of my fellow workers, and the rights of millions of Americans to contract for affordable cost-contained healthcare for our families has been grievously impaired" by legal extortion.

Professor Enthoven recommended several reforms, including:

-

Eliminating juries from medical cases, replacing them with specialized, expert judges

-

Damage caps on medical malpractice awards;

-

Stricter pre-trail screening of plaintiffs' claims;

-

Limits on contingency fees;

-

Increased reliance on binding arbitration; and

-

Institution of an "English Rule" where losing plaintiffs bear defendant's legal costs.

"There ought to be a restored sense of justice and respect for the common good to replace the rampant greed and self-aggrandizement that we now connect with trial lawyers." --Alain Enthoven

On behalf of health insurers, Karen Ignagni discussed some of the political dynamics of medical justice reform, reminding the audience of the power plaintiffs' attorneys wield in Washington and in individual states. She agreed with Professor Enthoven's description of the problem, and concurred with his reform agenda. But Ms. Ignagni decried not only the damage caused by lawyers; she also pointed a finger at the medical community itself:

"I don't think we can fight personal injury lawyers with one hand and enrich them with another. I think all of us in the healthcare community have to take a hard look at our roles in promoting the current system of injustice rather than justice. We have too many suits going on among stakeholders in the healthcare community, and we could be the first to set an example."

Ms. Ignagni expressed hope that rising healthcare costs and diminishing access to care would force both the public and politicians to focus on medical justice reform.

"The single most important stumbling block is as the Institute of Medicine called it... the culture of blame in healthcare." --Karen Ignagni

Donald Palmisano reported that doctors feel "threatened by a legal system that is out of control." Rising liability insurance premiums, which result from "frivolous lawsuits and a trend of increasing jury awards" are forcing doctors to leave practice or raise their fees.

It is the patients who suffer from lawsuit abuse, asserted Dr. Palmisano: "It drives up the cost of office visits, diagnostic tests, and prescriptions, and it creates long waits, or long trips for certain procedures patients can't get locally because specialists have been forced from high-risk practice areas. The media now reports almost daily that the situation is so bad in some states that emergency departments are losing staff and scaling back certain procedures, such as trauma units, as good physicians are forced to limit services, retire early, or move to another state with a less litigious climate."

Legislative tort reform, modeled on the long-standing laws in California (which, he asserted, reduce liability premiums in the state by over $1 billion a year), is high on the AMA's agenda. Dr. Palmisano concluded. "Physicians will not retreat from tort reform. We will advance from all directions."

"The reality of being sued is daunting to just about everyone in the medical community... it stifles the advancement of new medical treatments and medications, inhibits patient safety and quality improvement initiatives, overwhelms the healthcare system with paperwork leaving less time for patient care, and discourages qualified candidates from pursuing a career in medicine." --Dr. Donald Palmisano