First, I stated that poor investment results was a driving factor, not the only reason. Funny you mentioned St. Paul, they have pulled out of several markets due to excess losses. Having been in the arena and looking hard at both sides, I have seen where all parties contibute their share. Unfortunately, bad law, poor legislative proposals, failure to act in the best interest by parties, failure to act in prudent and efficient fashion, and the strong desire by attorneys to drag out litigation, all exacerbate the problem. I do know of ways to streamline the process and reduce claims. I am not alone. The people who have the power and money to fix the system however appear to be more concerned with their own pockets than giving the problem proper address.
Interesting article. Nowhere does it lay the blame for escalating Med Mal premiums at the feet of the real culprits which are the ambulance chasing attorneys and their TV ads and billboards. The battle cry is “I don’t get paid unless you win”.
Most cases never go to Court for many reasons not the least of which is the desire of the practioner to not have their names slandered by frivilous made up losses. This scum of the legal profession not only embarrasses competent attorneys but practices extortion with the Doc’s reputation.
History will show that the crises in all forms of liability and Med Mal and the rapidly costs associated with these coverages started at about the time the standards for advertising was done away with by the American Bar Association. Then the blood suckers started appearing with their TV, radio and billboard ads.
Tort reform that the Trial Lawyers supported U.S. Senators refuse to pass (democrats, I might add) is where the reform should take place. All this report does is to advocate the passing on of settlement costs to the ambulance chasers with tax payers subsidy as surely that is the way this proposal will end up.
How about listening to the medical profession and not the ambulance chasers.
Did the Doc’s and care instituions generate the crises?? No they did not, the trial lawyers that practice ambulance chasing in each instance has created the crises.
Medical costs are high and going higher due to the ambulance chasing attorneys and the Federal Gov’t oversight requirements that result in many billions of dollars not going into care but into CYA expense.
Common, let’s get repsonsible!!! Lay the blame where it belongs and lets get guts enough to fix the system and that means significant tort reform!!!
Rates are increasing due to poor investment returns over the last few years for the insurance companies and due to the healthcare industry’s failure to properly police themselves and remove bad and/or dangerous providers from the system. Once the dangers to the public are removed, the number of claims will decrease and so will the rates for malpractice insurance. The healthcare industry has no-one to blame but themselves.
I am in the insurance business and had written Med Mal since 1970. That was before the ABA turned its vultures loose on the health care industry and every other possible liability exposure.
I think JB is waiving the banner of the ambulance chasing attorneys who are not competent enough to build a practice worthy of their profession.
How will the claims ever decrease if the attorneys practicing in this arena are appearing on billboard, TV ads and radio; encouraging people to call them because “I don’t get paid unless you win”. Really think about what that misguided slogan suggests to people. Only an ignorant person would ever think that it does not encourage frivilous claims that end up extorting settlements from insurance comapanies and health care providers.
Nice try JB but it is the old party line and those of us in the business are not that gullable!!!!
You should have read the report on med mal from the GAO, dated August 2003. The General Accounting Office stated very clearly that the loss from investment income was a driving factor. Also the report exposed the “crisis” professed by the AMA as non-existant. Additionally, it has been noted that 5 percent of the healthcare providers account for over 50 percent of the claims.
There are a lot of very good studies presented by all sides. Maybe you need to take some time and read them all. This is a problem made to be very complex. Solutions have been offered by The Institute of Medicine and others. Unfortunately, too many special interest groups and legislators get involved to provide the needed relief to both consumers and providers. Way to much to go into on this forum.
I can fully agree with Jim’s comments on the blood sucking lawyers. How much truly goes to help the people who where injured to begin with. Federal Goverment Limiting the payout for suck Med-Mal claims might help but where does the real responsiblity lie?
We have heard from Jim Masiello and Ray nazinitsky who have identified themselves. So who is JB? Is JB in the insurance business or one of the lawyers benefiting from the great rip off.
Nothing personal, I just like a lively debate with a person who is not afraid to identify themselves and their profession. Thanks.
First, JB – If the medical malpractice crisis is just a result of bad investments, than companies like St. Paul and Farmer’s would be losing money in other lines of insurance also. They are not – those lines continue to be profitable.
The facts just don’t stake up.
Take a company – any med mal company – you name it – MMLIC, Norcal, The Doctors’ Co., ProAssurance, Medical Protective and I can assure you that you’ll not find any major fluctuation in investment returns ove the past 10 years. These companies are overwhelming invested in bonds with some conservative investments in stocks.
AND YET, Roy and Jim, the problem is not just ambulance chasers. It has to do with the fact that it is very, very expensive to defend a physician against a person who may believe, in their limited understanding of medicine, that they have been harmed. The same individuals who ARE at times harmed by physician who are negligent in the care. If you are in the med mal world and you read as many claims as I have – you know that sometimes physicians are negligent – period. And you know some doctor who you would not dare let open you up – you’d rather see the local vet.
The problem lies in the excessive costs for innocent individuals to defend themselves. When physicians are getting dismiised from over 60% of cases and winning in over 80% of cases that go to trial – the financial burden of “innocent until proven guilty” is falling on the backs of those whose should not have to bear it.
This issue is much deeper than both sides are sometimes willing to admit, but if we want to continue to have the best healthcare in the world, we need to find a solution and therefore, need to work to understand the real underlying dynamics.
I anm an Insurance Adjuster and I,ve handled Medmal since 1985 in Florida. The cases that make it to the courtroom have to have at least some meit as no intelligent Attorney is going to invest the 50K to 250K needed to make the case unless recovery is assured. The real problem is that the Industry does not really try to settle even the most valid cases, opting instead to use the hurdles to discourage the claimants. There are easy solutions to many problems, but no one wants to use them. As far as the plaintiff side, just make the relationship between Medmal attorney and client a real joint venture where the attorney also risks personal exposure for costs in a loser and you will reduce frivouless claims. On the defense side, let the Insurance department consider the fact that Investment income percentage stays the same so it is more profitable after a rate increase than before. As it stands now the carriwers are rewarded when they take ahit because they never tried to settle.
First, I stated that poor investment results was a driving factor, not the only reason. Funny you mentioned St. Paul, they have pulled out of several markets due to excess losses. Having been in the arena and looking hard at both sides, I have seen where all parties contibute their share. Unfortunately, bad law, poor legislative proposals, failure to act in the best interest by parties, failure to act in prudent and efficient fashion, and the strong desire by attorneys to drag out litigation, all exacerbate the problem. I do know of ways to streamline the process and reduce claims. I am not alone. The people who have the power and money to fix the system however appear to be more concerned with their own pockets than giving the problem proper address.
Interesting article. Nowhere does it lay the blame for escalating Med Mal premiums at the feet of the real culprits which are the ambulance chasing attorneys and their TV ads and billboards. The battle cry is “I don’t get paid unless you win”.
Most cases never go to Court for many reasons not the least of which is the desire of the practioner to not have their names slandered by frivilous made up losses. This scum of the legal profession not only embarrasses competent attorneys but practices extortion with the Doc’s reputation.
History will show that the crises in all forms of liability and Med Mal and the rapidly costs associated with these coverages started at about the time the standards for advertising was done away with by the American Bar Association. Then the blood suckers started appearing with their TV, radio and billboard ads.
Tort reform that the Trial Lawyers supported U.S. Senators refuse to pass (democrats, I might add) is where the reform should take place. All this report does is to advocate the passing on of settlement costs to the ambulance chasers with tax payers subsidy as surely that is the way this proposal will end up.
How about listening to the medical profession and not the ambulance chasers.
Did the Doc’s and care instituions generate the crises?? No they did not, the trial lawyers that practice ambulance chasing in each instance has created the crises.
Medical costs are high and going higher due to the ambulance chasing attorneys and the Federal Gov’t oversight requirements that result in many billions of dollars not going into care but into CYA expense.
Common, let’s get repsonsible!!! Lay the blame where it belongs and lets get guts enough to fix the system and that means significant tort reform!!!
Rates are increasing due to poor investment returns over the last few years for the insurance companies and due to the healthcare industry’s failure to properly police themselves and remove bad and/or dangerous providers from the system. Once the dangers to the public are removed, the number of claims will decrease and so will the rates for malpractice insurance. The healthcare industry has no-one to blame but themselves.
I am in the insurance business and had written Med Mal since 1970. That was before the ABA turned its vultures loose on the health care industry and every other possible liability exposure.
I think JB is waiving the banner of the ambulance chasing attorneys who are not competent enough to build a practice worthy of their profession.
How will the claims ever decrease if the attorneys practicing in this arena are appearing on billboard, TV ads and radio; encouraging people to call them because “I don’t get paid unless you win”. Really think about what that misguided slogan suggests to people. Only an ignorant person would ever think that it does not encourage frivilous claims that end up extorting settlements from insurance comapanies and health care providers.
Nice try JB but it is the old party line and those of us in the business are not that gullable!!!!
You should have read the report on med mal from the GAO, dated August 2003. The General Accounting Office stated very clearly that the loss from investment income was a driving factor. Also the report exposed the “crisis” professed by the AMA as non-existant. Additionally, it has been noted that 5 percent of the healthcare providers account for over 50 percent of the claims.
There are a lot of very good studies presented by all sides. Maybe you need to take some time and read them all. This is a problem made to be very complex. Solutions have been offered by The Institute of Medicine and others. Unfortunately, too many special interest groups and legislators get involved to provide the needed relief to both consumers and providers. Way to much to go into on this forum.
I can fully agree with Jim’s comments on the blood sucking lawyers. How much truly goes to help the people who where injured to begin with. Federal Goverment Limiting the payout for suck Med-Mal claims might help but where does the real responsiblity lie?
We have heard from Jim Masiello and Ray nazinitsky who have identified themselves. So who is JB? Is JB in the insurance business or one of the lawyers benefiting from the great rip off.
Nothing personal, I just like a lively debate with a person who is not afraid to identify themselves and their profession. Thanks.
John Bryant is my name. Was in the insurance business for many years. Now I am working with Louisiana Watch, a consumer advocate corporation.
If you would like you can contact me at lawatch@cox.net
To JB, Roy and Jim – You’re all wrong.
First, JB – If the medical malpractice crisis is just a result of bad investments, than companies like St. Paul and Farmer’s would be losing money in other lines of insurance also. They are not – those lines continue to be profitable.
The facts just don’t stake up.
Take a company – any med mal company – you name it – MMLIC, Norcal, The Doctors’ Co., ProAssurance, Medical Protective and I can assure you that you’ll not find any major fluctuation in investment returns ove the past 10 years. These companies are overwhelming invested in bonds with some conservative investments in stocks.
AND YET, Roy and Jim, the problem is not just ambulance chasers. It has to do with the fact that it is very, very expensive to defend a physician against a person who may believe, in their limited understanding of medicine, that they have been harmed. The same individuals who ARE at times harmed by physician who are negligent in the care. If you are in the med mal world and you read as many claims as I have – you know that sometimes physicians are negligent – period. And you know some doctor who you would not dare let open you up – you’d rather see the local vet.
The problem lies in the excessive costs for innocent individuals to defend themselves. When physicians are getting dismiised from over 60% of cases and winning in over 80% of cases that go to trial – the financial burden of “innocent until proven guilty” is falling on the backs of those whose should not have to bear it.
This issue is much deeper than both sides are sometimes willing to admit, but if we want to continue to have the best healthcare in the world, we need to find a solution and therefore, need to work to understand the real underlying dynamics.
Thanks,
DRM
I anm an Insurance Adjuster and I,ve handled Medmal since 1985 in Florida. The cases that make it to the courtroom have to have at least some meit as no intelligent Attorney is going to invest the 50K to 250K needed to make the case unless recovery is assured. The real problem is that the Industry does not really try to settle even the most valid cases, opting instead to use the hurdles to discourage the claimants. There are easy solutions to many problems, but no one wants to use them. As far as the plaintiff side, just make the relationship between Medmal attorney and client a real joint venture where the attorney also risks personal exposure for costs in a loser and you will reduce frivouless claims. On the defense side, let the Insurance department consider the fact that Investment income percentage stays the same so it is more profitable after a rate increase than before. As it stands now the carriwers are rewarded when they take ahit because they never tried to settle.