In what may have been seen as a footnote in President Obama's address to Congress earlier tonight, Mr. Obama briefly proposed the possibility of medical malpractice reform in the final health care bill. The President conceded that "defensive medicine", where doctors prescribe excessive treatments and tests in order to protect themselves against potential litigation, can lead to further cost strains on the system. Although this issue has received minimal attention from the media, I believe it is an important element of reform that deserves greater analysis in this debate.
The article "Tangible and Unseen Health-Care Costs", published in the September 3rd edition of the Wall Street Journal, provides a basic summary of the issue. The authors give projections of the total cost of "defensive medicine", while cautioning that an exact figure is difficult to determine. They explore different reform efforts including: capping the amount juries can award medical malpractice victims; requiring higher standards of evidence showing a doctor has committed a medical error; and offering protections for doctors from litigation when they follow specified medical standards about whether or not a test is required. The article points to the costs associated with excessive lawsuits and the high costs of medical liability insurance which doctors are forced to purchase. While the authors generally seem to support these reforms, they offer readers each perspective, quoting authorities on both sides of the debate.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I completely agree. When I asked my doctor what she thought of Obama's plans, she told me that she hoped it would alleviate her work load. Doctors have to see so many patients a day to pay for their own insurance to protect themselves from malpractice suits that are often ridiculous. Gross negligence is one thing but there has to be some kind of cap on these suits so doctors can worry about their patients not about getting sued.
ReplyDeleteAgreed as well. Hopefully if the health care reform works as planned, the public won't feel as stressed about their health and therefore not be so quick to jump at their doctors and the insurance companies for money. If they feel the health care they are receiving is fair rather then something they are being cheated or ripped off for, they will act fairly in return. The main concern of the doctors should always be care and the main concern of the patient should always be getting the care they need.
ReplyDeleteI think medical malpractice reform is certainly a big part of the overall health care issue and requires attention. It appears to be the general consensus that a trip to the doctor will often include a number of unnecessary tests that are driving up costs. One perspective on this seems to be this is done just to generate more money for the hospitals and doctors, however another perspective is that this is just a necessary precaution for doctors to take to avoid being sued. Medical malpractice reform is one way, among others, to help alleviate some of the cost a trip to the doctor takes.
ReplyDelete