Tennessee Medical Malpractice Legislation Passes House
Southeast News • April 7, 2008
Supporters of legislation that seeks to limit frivolous medical malpractice lawsuits in Tennessee say they're pleased to see their efforts paying off after several years.
House lawmakers voted ...
Insurance Journal is not responsible for the content of the message below.
Subject: MEDICAL MALPRACTICE TORT REFORM
Posted On: April 19, 2008, 2:02 pm CDT
Posted By: Leon
Comment:
A Taste of Their Own Medicine
In general, whenever threats are made for money we usually call that extortion. By law, extortion is illegal. However, whenever business persons and professionals, including their respective insurance carriers, are subjected to the threats of attorneys making frivolous allegations (threats) for money, it is called litigation.
Many physicians today are literally at the breaking point in being able to continue their practice due to the exorbitant cost of maintaining medical malpractice insurance. Tort reform, which has been hotly debated over the past couple of decades, will never be truly effective to any measurable degree. Why is this so?
Primarily because most legislators are attorneys, they will NEVER pass ANY legislation which will in any way encumber, limit, or control any source of revenue for attorneys.
The only way to stop the bleeding is to identify who is truly in the driver's seat. Consider, the vast majority of insurance carriers providing medical malpractice insurance ALSO provide the attorneys with their E&O liability coverage. Therefore, these are the same carriers which are also being nickel and dimed to death with frivolous lawsuit expenditures. Individually, none of these lawsuits amount to much in the general scheme of things, but collectively, every carrier along with their respective insureds are paying out untold billions of dollars. This DEFINITELY affects, not only their bottom line, but also that of everyone else.
Consider what would happen if…
The insurance carriers providing malpractice insurance for attorneys excluded ANY ATTORNEY engaging in medical malpractice litigation from their Errors and Omissions (E & O), general liability coverage? An attorney who could not purchase professional liability coverage would thus be uninsured and totally exposed to litigation. Alright! So this may be a bit unrealistic.
But, what if the insurance carriers charged such attorneys, as they do physicians (i.e. obstetricians), surgeons, etc., really exorbitant, outrageous premiums for the privilege of engaging in this particular occupational pursuit? The E&O premiums for attorneys under this arrangement could then be predicated and assessed upon the basis of the actual number of cases each respective attorney files. Say $25,000 for the first five cases filed by the attorney, $50,000 for the next five cases filed, and so on till they top out at a $250,000 maximum, or some similar type formula. How quick do you think the attorneys would be to file a lawsuit claiming malpractice on merely a whim, hoping for a quick out of court settlement?
The net effect would thereby be the reduction of the number of attorneys practicing this field of law to a comparatively few true specialists. The few remaining would in turn, then be taking on only those cases which they felt had real merit. Cases with real profit potential for them. The ambulance chasers would then be compelled to use whatever talents they may have in other pursuits.
Fight back! It's about time everyone urged the insurance industry to give the attorneys… "a taste of their own medicine!"
What a great way to improve the bottom line!
Subject: MEDICAL MALPRACTICE TORT REFORM
In general, whenever threats are made for money we usually call that extortion. By law, extortion is illegal. However, whenever business persons and professionals, including their respective insurance carriers, are subjected to the threats of attorneys making frivolous allegations (threats) for money, it is called litigation.
Many physicians today are literally at the breaking point in being able to continue their practice due to the exorbitant cost of maintaining medical malpractice insurance. Tort reform, which has been hotly debated over the past couple of decades, will never be truly effective to any measurable degree. Why is this so?
Primarily because most legislators are attorneys, they will NEVER pass ANY legislation which will in any way encumber, limit, or control any source of revenue for attorneys.
The only way to stop the bleeding is to identify who is truly in the driver's seat. Consider, the vast majority of insurance carriers providing medical malpractice insurance ALSO provide the attorneys with their E&O liability coverage. Therefore, these are the same carriers which are also being nickel and dimed to death with frivolous lawsuit expenditures. Individually, none of these lawsuits amount to much in the general scheme of things, but collectively, every carrier along with their respective insureds are paying out untold billions of dollars. This DEFINITELY affects, not only their bottom line, but also that of everyone else.
Consider what would happen if…
The insurance carriers providing malpractice insurance for attorneys excluded ANY ATTORNEY engaging in medical malpractice litigation from their Errors and Omissions (E & O), general liability coverage? An attorney who could not purchase professional liability coverage would thus be uninsured and totally exposed to litigation. Alright! So this may be a bit unrealistic.
But, what if the insurance carriers charged such attorneys, as they do physicians (i.e. obstetricians), surgeons, etc., really exorbitant, outrageous premiums for the privilege of engaging in this particular occupational pursuit? The E&O premiums for attorneys under this arrangement could then be predicated and assessed upon the basis of the actual number of cases each respective attorney files. Say $25,000 for the first five cases filed by the attorney, $50,000 for the next five cases filed, and so on till they top out at a $250,000 maximum, or some similar type formula. How quick do you think the attorneys would be to file a lawsuit claiming malpractice on merely a whim, hoping for a quick out of court settlement?
The net effect would thereby be the reduction of the number of attorneys practicing this field of law to a comparatively few true specialists. The few remaining would in turn, then be taking on only those cases which they felt had real merit. Cases with real profit potential for them. The ambulance chasers would then be compelled to use whatever talents they may have in other pursuits.
Fight back! It's about time everyone urged the insurance industry to give the attorneys… "a taste of their own medicine!"
What a great way to improve the bottom line!