http://www.atra.org/wrap/files.cgi/7964_howworks.html

How Tort Reform Works

TEXAS: Tort Reform Spurs Economic Growth; Aids Access to Healthcare

In 2003, the Texas state Legislature passed H.B. 4 to further reform the state’s civil justice system. The bill addressed issues such as: limits on noneconomic damages; product liability reform; punitive damages; medical liability reform joint and several liability; and class action reform. Voters also approved a constitutional amendment, Proposition 12, in 2003, which eliminates potential court challenges to the law that limited noneconomic damages to $750,000. Since the enactment of H.B. 4 and the subsequent passage of Proposition 12, Texas has made great strides in growing its economy and providing jobs and accessible healthcare to its citizens.

Successes in the medical community:

The American Medical Association dropped Texas from its list of states in medical liability crisis (Houston Chronicle, 5/17/05).

Malpractice claims are down and physician recruitment and retention are up, particularly in high risk specialties (Houston Chronicle, 5/17/05).

The five largest Texas insurers cut rates, which will save doctors about $50 million, according to the AMA (Houston Chronicle, 5/17/05).

Malpractice lawsuits in Harris County have dropped to about half of what they were in 2001 and 2002. There were 204 cases filed in 2004, compared with 441 in 2001 and 550 in 2002. There were 1,154 lawsuits filed in 2003, attributed to attorneys trying to file before the new law took effect (Houston Chronicle, 5/17/05).

Harris County has seen a net gain of 689 physicians, an 8.4 percent increase, according to the Texas State Board of Medical Examiners (Houston Chronicle, 5/17/05).

Texas Medical Liability Trust, the state’s largest liability carrier, reduced its premiums by 17 percent (Houston Chronicle, 5/17/05).

Fifteen new insurance companies have entered the Texas market (Associated Press, 2/16/05).

Health Care Indemnity, the state’s largest carrier for hospitals, cut rates by 15 percent in 2004 (Associated Press, 2/16/05).

American Physicians Insurance Exchange and The Doctor’s Company also reduced premiums (Associated Press, 2/16/05).

The American Physicians Insurance Exchange saw a $3.5 million reduction in premiums for Texas physicians in 2005. In addition, beginning May 1, 2005, 2,2000 of the 3,500 physicians insured by the company would see an average drop of 5 percent in their premiums (The Heartland Institute, 5/1/05).

Texas: Tort Reform Spurs Economic Growth

In 1995 the Texas Legislature passed a series of bills to reform the state’s civil justice system. These bills addressed: limits on punitive damages, joint and several liability, sanctions for filing frivolous suits, limits on venue shopping and out-of-state filings, modifications to deceptive trade practices and medical malpractice reform.

According to the study, The Impact of Judicial Reforms on Economic Activity in Texas, the total cost of the Texas tort system in 2000 was $15.482 billion.

Without reforms, it is estimated that the total cost would have been $25.889 billion.

Of the $10.407 billion in total direct savings, approximately $2.777 billion may be attributed to improvements at the national level while $7.630 billion in savings were from reforms in Texas.

Of the total savings, $2.542 billion went directly to benefit consumers.

The Perryman Group. The Impact of Judicial Reforms on Economic Activity in Texas Overall Economic Impact on State’s Economy. (August 2000)

Facts to Consider: Benefits to Consumers

It is estimated that reforms enacted in 1995 resulted in savings of $2.542 billion that directly benefits consumers.

$1.796 billion in annual cost savings from reduced inflation ($216 per household)

$7.056 billion in annual total personal growth income ($862 per household)

The net result was a savings of $1,078 per year to the typical Texas household.

The Perryman Group. The Impact of Judicial Reforms on Economic Activity in Texas Overall Economic Impact on State’s Economy. (August 2000)

In your first paragraph you yourself just admitted that the malpractice legal system is broken. The problem with malpractice is not compensation but punitive damages. Punitive means punishment and punishment is suppose to make people stop doing what they did to deserve punishment. If the system were working then punitive damages should be forcing bad doctors out of business, leaving good doctors in place. By your very own admission that is not happening. Instead both good and bad doctors are being punished.

Another tell-tale sign that malpractice is not working is that malpractice insurance premiums are NOT based on how many a doctors been sued or lost. This is not like auto insurance where your premiums increase if you have an accident. In the past insurance companies have actually tried to base malpractice premiums on the number of lawsuits, but they found that the correlation was too random. In other words, the number of past lawsuits against a doctor had no being on whether a doctor would be sued in the future.

The bottom line is that punitive damages in malpractice lawsuits are not improving the quality of healthcare but are simply driving up the cost for everyone. The system is broken.

Healthcare reform that involves government interference in any way should not happen. Maybe the system is broken, maybe it isn’t. But one thing that will not help the situation is tort reform. Lawsuits are not the problem.

Lawsuits are government interference in the marketplace.

Further, we have:

Study after study shows that 5% of all doctors commit 95% of the medical malpractice. Medical boards refuse to yank the licenses …

What your statistic really says is that only 5% of doctors commit malpractice on their patients. Given our experience with general human error curves, I would suspect that 1% of doctors commit half or more of the malpractice.

But how does that argue against tort reform? If 5% of doctors are out there committing serial malpractice, as you imply, then 95% of doctors are paying for it with their malpractice insurance and you and I are paying for all of it, ultimately.

Tort reform is not just limiting damages, but also instituting statutory guidelines for what doctors should and should not be held liable for doing. And in my considered opinion that is squarely in the middle of the purpose of government.

I don’t know much about it but I know how bad it is in hospitals their staff/ patient ratios. I’ve taken care of people in nursing homes due to bad surgeries too and it’s heart breaking. The lawyers are always talked about as being bad bad bad but what about the patients? What about the greed that makes management set up things to be unsafe.

So many of the problems seem to be because they are trying to make/save money but it’s so extreme. If I was an administrator I’d cut out some of the more do nothing offices and put more money into hiring more lower paid ancillary staff. I know we talk bad about unions on here but I am sure they are a good thing if they force the stafff/patient rations to be better.

Never leave a relative alone at the hospital on a regular floor (they do get good care in a unit usually), not even for 2 hours to go home and shower. If your having surgery you can request a specific CRNA and anesthesiologist. Try to ask someone that works in the OR who the staff picks when having a procedure done and request them.

the inclusion of comprehensive medical liability reform and insurance operability and portability are non-negotiable. They are an integral part of reducing health care costs and expanding coverage.

Denying the clear and successful track record where comprehensive medical liability reform has been instituted is disingenuous and does not make it so.

Everyone so far as I can read believes tort reform has no real bearing on the healthcare system. Agreed. From experience, my mother, at the age of, well let’s just say she’d not in the AARP yet, had her life forever changed by a gastro surgeon. Later, he was admitted into rehab for prescription drug addiction.

My parents tried to file suit, but to red4ever’s point, the legal system made it impossible for my parents to recoup any losses. My mother is permenantly disabled.

Who do we hold accountable? The holders of the power to grant licenses. How? If someone has that answer I’d sure like to hear it. Maybe they should be part of some of this litigation.

TMD