Malpractice lawsuit restrictions pass House

Lawmakers can say they at least did something about tort reform.

SB79, which gives special immunity to malpractice lawsuits under specified circumstances, was approved in the House on Tuesday, 53-18. The bill was passed in the Senate last week after two days of debate and a special compromise meeting with lawmakers, trial lawyers and health care system representatives.

The compromise, which was built into a third substitute bill and was the reason SB79 emerged from the Senate as a consensus bill didn't put much of a damper on debate in the House.

Lawmakers in favor of extending immunity and holding emergency room doctors to a different standard than other physicians hope to bring more doctors into the emergency room. They contended that the fear of a lawsuit is figuring into a drop in the number of specialists who are willing to work on-call ER shifts, a fear generated because the ER is different than a clinic because everyone must be treated, and the circumstances are often more stressful.

The new standards are being adopted on a trial basis and expire after four years. Some lawmakers said that attorneys, in working out the compromise and a sunset clause, are getting what they've wanted for years — proof, not anecdotes, that medical malpractice and frivolous medical procedure-related lawsuits are being filed left and right.

Rep. Steve Mascaro, R-West Jordan, said it's not the number of lawsuits filed (20 in Utah in 2008), it's the number of zeros in those checks if the court finds against the provider.

"The dollar amount of those lawsuits is the fear that creates the problem that is the heart of this issue," he said. "We've had way too many physicians leaving the practice, and this had to be addressed."