One arbitration bill wins backing

In a case of dueling arbitration bills, legislators Thursday endorsed a proposal viewed more friendly to doctors and stalled another measure supported heavily by patient advocates.

Still, the sponsor of the bill that failed to gain committee approval wasn't disappointed.

"What SB117 set out to do we accomplished," said Sen. Parley Hellewell, R-Orem. "We were able to get the mandatory part of arbitration out."

Hellewell's SB117 differed from the competing and successful SB245 by Sen. Leonard Blackham, R-Moroni, by allowing for the selection of only one mutually agreed upon arbitrator to settle a medical malpractice dispute.

Blackham's proposal provides for a panel of three arbitrators, one of which could be a medical professional, to decide claims. And in those cases in which both parties agree, one arbitrator could settle the claim.

That idea of a three-member panel led opponents in a jam-packed Senate Business and Labor committee hearing to claim it wasn't fair, saying the ability to have a medical professional participate as an arbitrator "stacks the deck" against the patient bringing the claim.

"We can't counter that," said Jim McConkie, an organizer of Patients Against Mandatory Medical Arbitration (PAMMA). McConkie said no Utah doctors would ever agree to testify against another medical professional in a claim, and the cost to find one from out of state would be exorbitant.

"If we go with SB245, the medical community and IHC will win every time," Hellewell said.

But the majority of committee members endorsed Blackham's proposal, with only Hellewell dissenting. Hellewell's measure stalled on a 4-4 vote, although he could ask for it to be heard again later.

Blackham's bill allows for several options in settling claims including arbitration or filing suit in district court. Under the bill, medical professionals can't refuse service if the patient refuses to sign an arbitration agreement, but patients have only 10 days to rescind the agreement they sign. Also, claims settled as a result of arbitration become public record.

The measure is seen as a conciliatory approach to ease patients' concerns about signing away their rights to go to court, yet at the same time provide some measure of protection for doctors, who say the fear of litigation is driving them out of business.

"OB/GYNs are dropping like flies," said Dr. Jane Bowman, vice chairwoman of an obstetrics/gynecology organization in Utah.