Reader comments
Readers' forum: Cap medical lawsuits
42 comments | Read story
The problem with caps | 12:24 a.m. Aug. 11, 2009
is that they punish the most seriously injured. Furthermore, it puts government
in the jury box. A very seriously injured person damaged by a drunk or drugged
doctor, for example, may deserve much more than the cap, so a cap would tie a
fair jury's hands and defeat justice. Utah juries tend to the some of the
most conservative in the nation. You don't see runaway verdicts here like
in coastal cities. Why fix what isn't broken?
Gus Talwynd | 1:11 a.m. Aug. 11, 2009
What is fair? This is a major question for the health industry where negligence
or malpractice is involved. Is it fair to limit what the industry has to pay
out for claims? Is it fair to those who have been injured?
The courtroom is an area where the defense attorneys for the health industry and the plaintiff's attorneys come together to argue their case. Often the health industry has deep pockets to wage their battle. Their resources often overwhelm the resources of the plaintiff.
Certainly the health industry wants to have a limit on what they have to pay. Like the auto and tobacco industry, they can put away just enough money to cover all the legal suits they know will be filed each year. Rather than improving the product, they just have another business expense. In this way, they can calculate executive oompensation and bonuses better.
So what is fair? If you are the victim of malpractice, negligence, or injury, what would you want to get your life back to some semblance of "normal"?
The courtroom is an area where the defense attorneys for the health industry and the plaintiff's attorneys come together to argue their case. Often the health industry has deep pockets to wage their battle. Their resources often overwhelm the resources of the plaintiff.
Certainly the health industry wants to have a limit on what they have to pay. Like the auto and tobacco industry, they can put away just enough money to cover all the legal suits they know will be filed each year. Rather than improving the product, they just have another business expense. In this way, they can calculate executive oompensation and bonuses better.
So what is fair? If you are the victim of malpractice, negligence, or injury, what would you want to get your life back to some semblance of "normal"?
Fact | 3:27 a.m. Aug. 11, 2009
The United States does not have the best health care system in the world.
Since 1999;
The United States ranks 23rd in infant mortality, down from 12th in 1960 and 21st in 1990.
The United States ranks 21st in life expectancy for men down from 1st in 1945 and 17th in 1960.
Outcome studies on a variety of diseases, such as coronary artery disease, and renal failure show the United States to rank below Canada and a wide variety of industrialized nations"
As far as Universal Health Care being too expensive;
The United States spends at least 40% more per capita on health care than any other industrialized country with universal health care.
The costs of health care in Canada as a % of GNP, which were identical to the United States when Canada changed to a single payer, universal health care system in 1971, have increased at a rate much lower than the United States, despite the US economy being much stronger than Canada’s.
The quality of health care in the US has deteriorated in the current for profit managed care system.
Treatments should not be denied based on a corporation’s quest to save money.
Since 1999;
The United States ranks 23rd in infant mortality, down from 12th in 1960 and 21st in 1990.
The United States ranks 21st in life expectancy for men down from 1st in 1945 and 17th in 1960.
Outcome studies on a variety of diseases, such as coronary artery disease, and renal failure show the United States to rank below Canada and a wide variety of industrialized nations"
As far as Universal Health Care being too expensive;
The United States spends at least 40% more per capita on health care than any other industrialized country with universal health care.
The costs of health care in Canada as a % of GNP, which were identical to the United States when Canada changed to a single payer, universal health care system in 1971, have increased at a rate much lower than the United States, despite the US economy being much stronger than Canada’s.
The quality of health care in the US has deteriorated in the current for profit managed care system.
Treatments should not be denied based on a corporation’s quest to save money.
Comments continue below
Timj | 4:15 a.m. Aug. 11, 2009
Most states have caps on pain and suffering.
The real cost is end-of-life care. I sometimes look at a patient's billing record--I spent a good portion of my day yesterday going over the billing record of an elderly lady, in poor health and in a nursing home, who spent three or four weeks in a hospital right before she died. Her bill for those weeks was well over $800,000. That's approaching a million bucks. And we're paying for it.
When we say "rationing" it always sounds ugly--but it needs to be done or we'll drive this country even more bankrupt.
Lawsuits can be costly, but compared to other costs, they're just a drop in the bucket.
The real cost is end-of-life care. I sometimes look at a patient's billing record--I spent a good portion of my day yesterday going over the billing record of an elderly lady, in poor health and in a nursing home, who spent three or four weeks in a hospital right before she died. Her bill for those weeks was well over $800,000. That's approaching a million bucks. And we're paying for it.
When we say "rationing" it always sounds ugly--but it needs to be done or we'll drive this country even more bankrupt.
Lawsuits can be costly, but compared to other costs, they're just a drop in the bucket.
utahnative | 4:16 a.m. Aug. 11, 2009
Already done, most states have a $250,000 cap on punitive damages. Awards for
compensatory damages are based on the projected cost of care for the injured
person. If an injured persons care was already covered under government health
care compensatory damages are a moot point. To stop torts start universal health
care.
Imo | 5:45 a.m. Aug. 11, 2009
Scientific American posted an article yesterday that states "Deaths from
avoidable medical error more than double in past decade".
Still think medical lawsuits should be capped?
Still think medical lawsuits should be capped?
ECR | 5:53 a.m. Aug. 11, 2009
An interesting fact is that limiting damage awards doesn't necessarily do
the trick. Ohio enacted a $350,000 cap on non-economic damages in most
malpractice cases, such as awards for pain and suffering.
Having a damage cap was supposed to reduce insurance rates for doctors by allowing insurers to better predict their potential losses. But depending on their specialty and the insurer involved, doctors in Ohio saw rate increases ranging from 10 percent to 87 percent or more in 2003 and 2004.
A better solution would be to require the losing party to pay the legal expenses of the winner. This is done in every industrialized nation in the world except the U.S.. If someone files a frivilous lawsuit and they lose, they have to pay the legal costs of the person they sued. That should reduce, significantly, the number of lawsuits filed. But the evidence in Ohio proves that insurance companies might still charge exhorbitant fees.
Having a damage cap was supposed to reduce insurance rates for doctors by allowing insurers to better predict their potential losses. But depending on their specialty and the insurer involved, doctors in Ohio saw rate increases ranging from 10 percent to 87 percent or more in 2003 and 2004.
A better solution would be to require the losing party to pay the legal expenses of the winner. This is done in every industrialized nation in the world except the U.S.. If someone files a frivilous lawsuit and they lose, they have to pay the legal costs of the person they sued. That should reduce, significantly, the number of lawsuits filed. But the evidence in Ohio proves that insurance companies might still charge exhorbitant fees.
Paul in MD | 6:29 a.m. Aug. 11, 2009
The first commenter seems to think the cap is going to be set at some paltry
amount. No one is suggesting that. However, when malpractice lawsuits generate
awards in the tens or hundreds of millions of dollars, something is out of
whack.
The award amount should be enough to take care of the injured party, including replacing his/her salary if necessary for a reasonable amount of time.
My brother-in-law has his own medical practice, handling many patients and employing several doctors. His malpractice insurance (after having zero lawsuits over the last 15 years) costs him a third of his billable receipts. That is just wrong.
The award amount should be enough to take care of the injured party, including replacing his/her salary if necessary for a reasonable amount of time.
My brother-in-law has his own medical practice, handling many patients and employing several doctors. His malpractice insurance (after having zero lawsuits over the last 15 years) costs him a third of his billable receipts. That is just wrong.
Asaph | 6:31 a.m. Aug. 11, 2009
Malpractice settlements are a VERY small part of overall medical costs in this
country. The fallacy that this is ruining our medical systems is another myth
perpetuated by the insurance industry. There is more and graver malpractice as
present conditions have made medical treatment dangerous for folks with
little/no money
Anonymous | 6:33 a.m. Aug. 11, 2009
Actually, we do not have the "best healthcare in the world," far from
it. We have the most expensive, most wasteful, and most inefficient healthcare
system in the world, with overall results that put us pretty far down the list
as compared to other advanced countries. We may have great, but extremely
expensive, healthcare for those at the top of the economic ladder. But, the vast
majority of Americans do not have access to such a high level of care because of
private health insurance restrictions (aka rationing)--exclusions, lifetime
caps, co-pays, and limits on coverage. As a result, most of us could not afford
such care without going broke.
Tort reform is a red herring of the right. Medical malpractice payouts are less than one percent of total U.S. health care costs. All “losses” (verdicts, settlements, legal fees, etc.) have stayed under one percent for the last 18 years.The Congressional Budget Office found that “Malpractice costs account for less than 2 percent of [health care] spending.” Congressional Budget Office, Limiting Tort Liability for Medical Malpractice 1, 6 (Jan. 8, 2004). Surely those who have been severely damaged by medical malpractice have a right to appropriate compensation.
Tort reform is a red herring of the right. Medical malpractice payouts are less than one percent of total U.S. health care costs. All “losses” (verdicts, settlements, legal fees, etc.) have stayed under one percent for the last 18 years.The Congressional Budget Office found that “Malpractice costs account for less than 2 percent of [health care] spending.” Congressional Budget Office, Limiting Tort Liability for Medical Malpractice 1, 6 (Jan. 8, 2004). Surely those who have been severely damaged by medical malpractice have a right to appropriate compensation.
same old necons | 6:46 a.m. Aug. 11, 2009
its funny that every proposal towards refusing the cost of insurance targets the
victims of malpractice but none of it targets the insurance companies racking in
money hand over fist with the outrageous rates they charge. NO matter what it is
we can never place any blame with the money gropers at the top its always the
little guys falt no matter how outrageously the guy at the top acts.
Anonymous | 6:55 a.m. Aug. 11, 2009
There are two sides to every issus. While I agree that this issue must be
considered, basic health insurance reform is essential and should not be delayed
any more.
Progressive | 7:15 a.m. Aug. 11, 2009
Two things wrong with the letter. First of all the claim that America has the
best health care in the world, by what standard? It's certainly not the
standard of access, nor can it be the standard of outcome as measured by the
society as a whole. There are marvelous individual treatments, but guess what
the rest of the world has the same treatments. The only standard that fits the
claim is the wealth generated by our health care system for some doctors and all
insurance companies. Wow, that's something to be proud of!!
Lastly, the number I heard was that malpractice lawsuits added 1% to medical costs, hardly a figure that would resolve health care costs.
Lastly, the number I heard was that malpractice lawsuits added 1% to medical costs, hardly a figure that would resolve health care costs.
DBG | 7:46 a.m. Aug. 11, 2009
This writer needs to do a little more research. Speciality doctors (OBs,
Neurosurgeons) pay $100,000 in preimums NOT $200,000.
Canada has caps on malpractice suits. And you know what? The average payout in Canada is higher than the US. The average payout in malpractice suit is around $250,000.
Tort reform will do nothing to controll costs. The rise of malpratice premiums are not even in the top 5 factors that are at the crux of the problem.
Canada has caps on malpractice suits. And you know what? The average payout in Canada is higher than the US. The average payout in malpractice suit is around $250,000.
Tort reform will do nothing to controll costs. The rise of malpratice premiums are not even in the top 5 factors that are at the crux of the problem.
Roland Kayser | 8:07 a.m. Aug. 11, 2009
To ECR: Loser pays laws make it virtually impossible for any average person to
sue a large corporation, regardless of the merit of the case. Corporations can
pay legal expenses far beyond what any average person can pay. It doesn't
matter how many times the consumer wins in court, they will keep appealing until
you can no longer continue to fight financially.
RedShirt | 8:08 a.m. Aug. 11, 2009
To "Fact | 3:27 a.m." the fact you forget to mention is that the
ranking you quote is from WHO. According to World Markets Research Center, the
US ranks 17th out of 175 countries. Their ranking is on a scale of 0 to 100,
and the US has a score of 94. The top scoring country had a score of 98. To
simply say that the US sytem fails just because of it's ranking is
crazy.
Look at the scoring, that tells a better picture. If the US was 100th on a list of 100 countries for ice-cream production, does that the US ice-cream production is failing and must be replaced? Now, if you know that the ice-cream production ranking was based on million of gallons produced, and the best produced 1.2 million gallons, and the worst produced 1.19 million gallons, does that make a difference?
As for the infant mortality rates, you do realize that the US counts anything with a pulse, and countries like france only cout it if it meets a minimum length and weight. So, using infant mortality is a faulty premise.
Look at the scoring, that tells a better picture. If the US was 100th on a list of 100 countries for ice-cream production, does that the US ice-cream production is failing and must be replaced? Now, if you know that the ice-cream production ranking was based on million of gallons produced, and the best produced 1.2 million gallons, and the worst produced 1.19 million gallons, does that make a difference?
As for the infant mortality rates, you do realize that the US counts anything with a pulse, and countries like france only cout it if it meets a minimum length and weight. So, using infant mortality is a faulty premise.
RedShirt | 8:11 a.m. Aug. 11, 2009
I agree with ECR. Making a loser pay system would be best because it costs an
average of $20,000 to defend a doctor against a malpractice claim. That is just
to defend the doctor, regardless of the outcome.
Progressive | 8:19 a.m. Aug. 11, 2009
Most of these posts have done a nice job of stating the true facts of American
Health Insurance and some have implied what American Health care is great at but
let me state it directly. What we are best at is creating wealth for the
insurance companies and some doctors. We are far and away the best at this in
the world. Our health care system is not designed to just treat health problems
but it is designed to create wealth, not pay expenses or reward some risk but
create wealth. Now isn't that something to be proud of...sounds immoral to
me.
@Fact | 8:33 a.m. Aug. 11, 2009
Keep the system asis, if you like Canada, Great Britain, Sweden, Cuba, etc.
health care why don't you get it over there? leave mine alone.
ECR | 8:47 a.m. Aug. 11, 2009
Roland - I share your concern for the average guy trying to sue a large
corporation but there are lawyer's who will stake a strong case with no
fees up front but who expect a sizable portion of the award for themselves when
they win. On the other hand, an avarage citizen friend of mine was sued by an
insurance company who was trying to recoup costs paid out to one of their policy
holders. They claimed my friend was partially to blame but their policy holder
accepted full blame. The insurance company offered an out of court settlement
that was outrageous, under the circumstances, but was less than my friend would
have paid to defend himself. So my friend wrote a $10,000 check (actually he
made monthly payments) to the insurance compnay simply because they have a
stable of lawyers with nothing to do. Had the law been different the insurance
compnay would not have filed the suit, knowing they had no case. That is how to
keep costs down, limit the number of suits but making it less attractive.
Ultra Bob | 8:47 a.m. Aug. 11, 2009
Jin Dublinski, would you also put the same cap on all other lawsuits? Many of
the lawsuits arising out of automobile accidents are just as wildly expensive as
the medical lawsuits. In an automobile accident you are harmed by a person who
really didn’t mean to harm you, just like your health care provider
doesn’t really mean to harm you?
Or did he? The health care individual’s income, profits and livelihood depends on sick or injured people. When a person is cured, the doctor loses an income source.
Like the capitalist, the health care provider must oppose any force that threatens his income and happiness. He would much rather operate in total freedom without the concerns of being careful, legal and honest.
The health care industry is just like any other industry. People are there for the purpose of making a living. What we do there should be the same for all other industries.
And if we remove the avenue to justice through the courts, we need to make medical accidents a felony crime
Or did he? The health care individual’s income, profits and livelihood depends on sick or injured people. When a person is cured, the doctor loses an income source.
Like the capitalist, the health care provider must oppose any force that threatens his income and happiness. He would much rather operate in total freedom without the concerns of being careful, legal and honest.
The health care industry is just like any other industry. People are there for the purpose of making a living. What we do there should be the same for all other industries.
And if we remove the avenue to justice through the courts, we need to make medical accidents a felony crime
Sterling | 9:34 a.m. Aug. 11, 2009
One point that no one has alluded to up to this point is that pretty much ALL of
congress are attorneys themselves. They DO NOT believe in harming their
profession.
Yes, malpractice lawsuits SHOULD be limited, and yes, it is a good idea to make the loser pay the cost of the lawsuit.
For all those who say that it WON'T make ANY difference in insurance, and/or medical costs, why not try it? Its just ONE MORE THING that is worth a try to keep healthcare costs down!
If Congress is going to pass their healthcare reform package, they MUST find a way to make it palatable to MORE Americans!
Yes, malpractice lawsuits SHOULD be limited, and yes, it is a good idea to make the loser pay the cost of the lawsuit.
For all those who say that it WON'T make ANY difference in insurance, and/or medical costs, why not try it? Its just ONE MORE THING that is worth a try to keep healthcare costs down!
If Congress is going to pass their healthcare reform package, they MUST find a way to make it palatable to MORE Americans!
RedShirt | 9:34 a.m. Aug. 11, 2009
To "Ultra Bob | 8:47 a.m." so are you saying that we should maintain
our private insurance companies?
I ask this because you said "The health care industry is just like any other industry. People are there for the purpose of making a living. What we do there should be the same for all other industries." If I take that and extrapolate it out, then you are either proposing that government take over all businesses (that is what the government system would eventually do) or you are proposing that government stay out of healthcare.
Which are you promoting?
I ask this because you said "The health care industry is just like any other industry. People are there for the purpose of making a living. What we do there should be the same for all other industries." If I take that and extrapolate it out, then you are either proposing that government take over all businesses (that is what the government system would eventually do) or you are proposing that government stay out of healthcare.
Which are you promoting?
Funny | 9:58 a.m. Aug. 11, 2009
If you are a Supreme Court nominee, you'd better not say anything like
"other countries are doing it".
But if you're proposing a cap to medical lawsuits, then of course we should do what other countries are doing.
But if you're proposing a cap to medical lawsuits, then of course we should do what other countries are doing.
Challenge | 10:01 a.m. Aug. 11, 2009
Name the last 5 "outrageous" medical settlements awarded in Salt Lake
County.
A bit steep? Just name 3.
Still too rough? Just cite one outrageous medical settlement in Salt Lake County this year.
I don't doubt that sometimes there is an outrageous settlement. I don't believe it is the main cause of spiraling medical costs.
A bit steep? Just name 3.
Still too rough? Just cite one outrageous medical settlement in Salt Lake County this year.
I don't doubt that sometimes there is an outrageous settlement. I don't believe it is the main cause of spiraling medical costs.
BH | 10:12 a.m. Aug. 11, 2009
Tort reform would result in significant savings. But it will never happen as
long as Congress is composed primarily of lawyers. The trial lawyers are major
contributors to the democrats in congress. In fact, this congress just gave the
trial lawyers a big tax break. I think that is known as payback.
Ernest T. Bass | 10:55 a.m. Aug. 11, 2009
Lawyers are bad? I thought most of the writers of our Constitution and
Declaration of Independance were lawyers. I must be missing something.
Gus Talwynd | 11:46 a.m. Aug. 11, 2009
It is an amusing fact that the Bush Administration supported tort reform except
when it came to have it's lawyers in the Justice Department go after
Democrats in a politically-charged pogrom orchestrated by Karl Rove. However,
they were exposed to great embarassment.
George W. Bush's hostility to lawyers may be the result of being denied admission to the University of Texas School of Law. Since he could not be one of them, he maintained a bitterness that serve him in his political career. Then he was able to use family connections to gain admittance to the Harvard Business School.
The point of all this is that conservatives don't like lawyers until they need one. Tort reform, as envisioned by those involved in the industries that are at risk, is strongly sought after unless the same people have need of an attorney's services.
George W. Bush's hostility to lawyers may be the result of being denied admission to the University of Texas School of Law. Since he could not be one of them, he maintained a bitterness that serve him in his political career. Then he was able to use family connections to gain admittance to the Harvard Business School.
The point of all this is that conservatives don't like lawyers until they need one. Tort reform, as envisioned by those involved in the industries that are at risk, is strongly sought after unless the same people have need of an attorney's services.
wallofvoodoo | 12:19 p.m. Aug. 11, 2009
I agree there should be a looser pays rule in lawsuits. There needs to be
malpractice reform & tort reform as any realistic effort to reform the
system.
Will it happen? Not likely. That would be like CEOs getting paid what they are worth, term limits & campaign finance reform. Not going to happen in our lifetime.
Will it happen? Not likely. That would be like CEOs getting paid what they are worth, term limits & campaign finance reform. Not going to happen in our lifetime.
ICE CREAM | 12:19 p.m. Aug. 11, 2009
8:08 AM
"...infant mortality is a faulty premise...".
Not if your infant died at the hands of a quack.
"...infant mortality is a faulty premise...".
Not if your infant died at the hands of a quack.
SashimiGuy | 12:41 p.m. Aug. 11, 2009
The commenter who posted under the name of Fact above is right on. We do trail
the rest of the world. The sad thing is that we generate and possess much of
the talent used to preserve and protect life. The sad thing is that we are
hiding much of this talent from our fellow countrymen.
The sad fact also is that 62% of the bankruptcies are filed because of medical problems. 75% of those filing for medical bankruptcy had health insurance at the time they became sick or injured.
All of this creates a very litigious environment where you better take what you can, when you can, because it is very likely that it will be required of you when you really need it.
The sad fact also is that 62% of the bankruptcies are filed because of medical problems. 75% of those filing for medical bankruptcy had health insurance at the time they became sick or injured.
All of this creates a very litigious environment where you better take what you can, when you can, because it is very likely that it will be required of you when you really need it.
RedShirt | 12:58 p.m. Aug. 11, 2009
To "ICE CREAM | 12:19 p.m." read "Behind the Baby Count" at
US News & World Report. They explain how many other countries have similar
infant mortality rates as the US, if they were to be judged on the same
criteria, they would have similar statistics.
Here is a key point "Infant mortality in developed countries is not about healthy babies dying of treatable conditions as in the past. Most of the infants we lose today are born critically ill, and 40 percent die within the first day of life. The major causes are low birth weight and prematurity, and congenital malformations."
So, it isn't about healty babies dying "at the hands of a quack". It is about counting unhealthy babies at birth, and deciding what counts as a live birth and what does not.
Here is a key point "Infant mortality in developed countries is not about healthy babies dying of treatable conditions as in the past. Most of the infants we lose today are born critically ill, and 40 percent die within the first day of life. The major causes are low birth weight and prematurity, and congenital malformations."
So, it isn't about healty babies dying "at the hands of a quack". It is about counting unhealthy babies at birth, and deciding what counts as a live birth and what does not.
@Red Shirt | 1:59 p.m. Aug. 11, 2009
Many countries have adopted the same criteria for counting infant mortality
rates.
RedShirt | 2:57 p.m. Aug. 11, 2009
To "@Red Shirt | 1:59 p.m." please name some the countries that have
the same criteria, and your source.
Get Smart Now | 3:36 p.m. Aug. 11, 2009
HealthCare Change pressure is mounting.
The current for profit healthcare system is unethical and just about as ridicules as a for profit police or fire department would be if privatized.
Imagine getting the following responses from police and fire department.
"You didnt pay your premiums so we cannot help you with the crime (Fire, Rape, Robbery, Shooting etc) being committed."
"Please pay your premium in the future and maybe we will help you in the future if you survive this one."
"Sorry this is not a public problem but a private problem because it is happening at your home."
"Sorry, Our police captain and his officers didnt make enough bonuses this month."
"It looks like you dont make enough money for us to help you."
"Have you used the freedom of filing for bankruptcy"
The current for Profit Healthcare System is built on all these excuses.
The quality of health care in the US has deteriorated under the privatized for profit system.
Treatments should not be denied because of a corporations quest for profits.
The Healthcare industry should be a nonprofit industry.
A public government healthcare option is needed to control costs and give the people choice.
The current for profit healthcare system is unethical and just about as ridicules as a for profit police or fire department would be if privatized.
Imagine getting the following responses from police and fire department.
"You didnt pay your premiums so we cannot help you with the crime (Fire, Rape, Robbery, Shooting etc) being committed."
"Please pay your premium in the future and maybe we will help you in the future if you survive this one."
"Sorry this is not a public problem but a private problem because it is happening at your home."
"Sorry, Our police captain and his officers didnt make enough bonuses this month."
"It looks like you dont make enough money for us to help you."
"Have you used the freedom of filing for bankruptcy"
The current for Profit Healthcare System is built on all these excuses.
The quality of health care in the US has deteriorated under the privatized for profit system.
Treatments should not be denied because of a corporations quest for profits.
The Healthcare industry should be a nonprofit industry.
A public government healthcare option is needed to control costs and give the people choice.
RedShirt | 3:38 p.m. Aug. 11, 2009
To "SashimiGuy | 12:41 p.m." if you talk bankruptcies, you should also
note that there are at most 1.6 million bankruptcies filed every year, and if
62% of bankruptcies are due to medical bills, then only 0.3% of the US
population files for medical bankruptcies every year.
Now, to relate this to a common disease. You are more likely to have diabetes (57 million people in the US have type 1 or 2 diabetes) than you are to file for bankruptcy.
You are more likely to be considered obese (72 million in the US) than to declare bankruptcy.
In the US 237 million people are on dialisys, so you are more likely to need dialisys than declare bankruptcy.
13.6% of teen age girls get pregnant, which is more likely than filing for bankruptcy based on medical bills.
There are approximately 6 million car accidents every year, which means you are about 6 times more likely to get in a car accident than file for bankruptcy.
I hope you get my point. To radically change the healthcare system based on less than 1% of the population is insane. There are diseases and problems that effect more people.
Now, to relate this to a common disease. You are more likely to have diabetes (57 million people in the US have type 1 or 2 diabetes) than you are to file for bankruptcy.
You are more likely to be considered obese (72 million in the US) than to declare bankruptcy.
In the US 237 million people are on dialisys, so you are more likely to need dialisys than declare bankruptcy.
13.6% of teen age girls get pregnant, which is more likely than filing for bankruptcy based on medical bills.
There are approximately 6 million car accidents every year, which means you are about 6 times more likely to get in a car accident than file for bankruptcy.
I hope you get my point. To radically change the healthcare system based on less than 1% of the population is insane. There are diseases and problems that effect more people.
RE: Fact | 3:27 a.m | 5:42 p.m. Aug. 11, 2009
Theis oNEVERY IMORTANT FACT you ingnore.
all those ratings are based on SOCIALISTIC CRITERIA,
and created by people with a socialist agenda,
and each country gathers stats according to their own whims,
and so, are NOT an actual OBJECTIVE evaluation of health care itself.
so you LIBERALS can cling to your meaningless socialistic ratings.
I thing I do KNOW is I rather get care here than anywhere else,
cost problems can be fixed,
government involvement not so easily.
MOST socialistx love their system because they BELIEVE it is free, people love freebies, and easy to use,
but NONE care much for the actual quality.
all those ratings are based on SOCIALISTIC CRITERIA,
and created by people with a socialist agenda,
and each country gathers stats according to their own whims,
and so, are NOT an actual OBJECTIVE evaluation of health care itself.
so you LIBERALS can cling to your meaningless socialistic ratings.
I thing I do KNOW is I rather get care here than anywhere else,
cost problems can be fixed,
government involvement not so easily.
MOST socialistx love their system because they BELIEVE it is free, people love freebies, and easy to use,
but NONE care much for the actual quality.
lost in DC | 5:54 p.m. Aug. 11, 2009
Fact 3:27 cited results, not causes. We rank where we do, not because of the
quality or availability of our healthcare, but because of our lifestyles.
we smoke too much
we eat too much
we have poor diets
we exercise too little
we engage in unsafe sex
we abuse drugs (legal and illegal)
we are too violent
we drink too much
too many of us clog too few roadways
regardless of the quality of the care provided, these factors make the end results less than they could be. Using a mathematical example, if lifestyle and healthcare were rated on scales of 1-10, with 10 being highest, "9" healthcare with a "3" lifestyle (9X3=27) won't beat other developed countries with better lifestyles (6X5=30, or 7X4=28) you need to consider all factors when looking at our health, not just the quality of the care.
Those of you stating tort claims are a very small percentage are ignoring the cost of successful defenses and defensive medicine, you're not looking at the whole picture. Tort reform is not the end-all be-all, but is an important component.
we smoke too much
we eat too much
we have poor diets
we exercise too little
we engage in unsafe sex
we abuse drugs (legal and illegal)
we are too violent
we drink too much
too many of us clog too few roadways
regardless of the quality of the care provided, these factors make the end results less than they could be. Using a mathematical example, if lifestyle and healthcare were rated on scales of 1-10, with 10 being highest, "9" healthcare with a "3" lifestyle (9X3=27) won't beat other developed countries with better lifestyles (6X5=30, or 7X4=28) you need to consider all factors when looking at our health, not just the quality of the care.
Those of you stating tort claims are a very small percentage are ignoring the cost of successful defenses and defensive medicine, you're not looking at the whole picture. Tort reform is not the end-all be-all, but is an important component.
As a Physician: | 9:21 p.m. Aug. 12, 2009
The public should know that surveys of currently practicing have revealed that
2/3 physicians would leave medicine tomorrow if they could. Morale is very low.
The number one negative given (among many) as a reason for low morale: the
threat of litigation. I think legitimately injured people should be
compensated. Even though money rarely can. Most claims are frivolous. Defensive
medicine costs billions!
More than 60% of all verdict amounts go to the plantiff lawyers. The "injured" gets what is left over. Why should an attorney hit the lottery when a "bad event" occurs. If they really cared about their clients they would reduce their fees and share more with those who really need it.
Just remember this low morale reality of your doctors. There are fewer neurosurgeons/OBs practicing now than 5 years ago. The #1 reason: rising premiums (scientific data). They are not easy to replace!
More than 60% of all verdict amounts go to the plantiff lawyers. The "injured" gets what is left over. Why should an attorney hit the lottery when a "bad event" occurs. If they really cared about their clients they would reduce their fees and share more with those who really need it.
Just remember this low morale reality of your doctors. There are fewer neurosurgeons/OBs practicing now than 5 years ago. The #1 reason: rising premiums (scientific data). They are not easy to replace!
I've been there | 4:47 a.m. Nov. 16, 2009
I lost my 24 yo wife to a negligent doctor. If you could see the inside of a
malpractice case it would change your mind. A doctor said my wife was fine - for
3 days I took her to the ER. She finnaly was admitted by a different ER where
they were qualified to know it was a heart problem. Anyway in 200 words. 8 years
of Idaho legal system bullognia, stalling, biased judges, removing the case to
the home town of the doctor, splitting my case in half against the hospital and
2 doctors, dissmissing the hospital half and trying the doctor half in one of
thier hometowns where half the jury were his patients, a judge I caught winking
at the doctor, major hardball from the defense they brought 10 experts to our 2,
the doctors in idaho said they were afraid to testify agaisnt the doctors for
fear of being blackballed and reprizal from insurance companies and even though
it was a slam dunk I lost and the winking judge ordered I pay $75,000 to them
for thier legal fees... Think tort reform hasn't happend yet? They want
even more? Amazing.
Anonymous | 4:59 a.m. Nov. 16, 2009
2/3 would leave if they could? Right if they could make $250,000 starting pay
like my brother-in-law somewhere else.
They are scared of ever having to make a meager living like the rest of us.
It's very hard to get a lawyer to take a case allready. You have to have very serious damages and the legal damages have to add up. If you die they very inhumanely figure out what you would have made during the rest of your expected lifetime.
If Doctors would self regulate and reduce errors that would be the correct solution - not reducing the compensation for damamges. That's just a back-end added cost of healthcare for those injured by it.
They are scared of ever having to make a meager living like the rest of us.
It's very hard to get a lawyer to take a case allready. You have to have very serious damages and the legal damages have to add up. If you die they very inhumanely figure out what you would have made during the rest of your expected lifetime.
If Doctors would self regulate and reduce errors that would be the correct solution - not reducing the compensation for damamges. That's just a back-end added cost of healthcare for those injured by it.
2/3 is good ! | 5:04 a.m. Nov. 16, 2009
100% of the people I know would quit thier jobs if they could. Doctors have it
GOOOOOOOOOD.
Add your comment
Comments are monitored. Any comments found to be abusive, offensive, off-topic, misrepresentative, more than 200 words or containing URLs will not be posted.
Words Remaining
E-mail address: For internal use only. We may want to contact you to publish your comment (not your e-mail address) in the newspaper or for a separate story idea.
- 4A: Timpview wins 4th in 4 years 4:30 a.m.
- 3A: Juan Diego 12, Hurricane 10 4:18 a.m.
- 3A: Juan Diego vs. Hurricane 4:17 a.m.
- TCU still has a chance 2:04 a.m.
- Unranked Orange move to 4-0 1:52 a.m.
- Cougars cruise to victory in Hawaii 1:38 a.m.
- 5A: Bingham vs Davis 1:32 a.m.
- 5A: Bingham 35, Davis 24 1:30 a.m.
- 5A: Darts impress in title loss 1:13 a.m.
- 5A: Miners' Cantwell makes name 1:11 a.m.
- Mailman's nomination delivered
- Jazz finally win in San Antonio
- U. professor dies after fall from bus
- 4A: Timpview wins 4th in 4 years
- 'New Moon' rising: Vamps vs. 'wolves
- Unga's status 'a game-time decision'
- Archuleta still calls Utah home
- Horrifying scenario described
- Officer cleared in Cardall Taser case
- 'New Moon' doesn't rise to occasion
- Buttars wants to limit gay rights laws
182 - Palin plans tour stop in Utah167
- BYU, Utah struck gold in coaches123
- Lies shatter Utah family122
- Palin's book shows she's unqualified105
- Officer cleared in Cardall Taser case96
- BYU cuts Women's Research Inst.95
- Jazz finally win in San Antonio95
- Utes knock off rival Aggies92
- Huntsman pleased with Obama84
I don't pretend to be an expert on global warming. I've met with...
Latest comments
so proud of you H town boys. we cant ask for better. as for not being back...
Great pictures! I was there and got some pretty good ones, but the your...
Part of the point of saying "gosh" is to avoid vain repetition of the name of...
A well deserved accomplishment for a terrific coach. And doing it in...
The hour is late and I'm not very bright, but I don't understand your post at...
I thought the Aggies were in the game until the end of the 2nd quarter. A...
Sorry to break the news to you, but Boise State really is not that good....
UH guard Hiram Thompson is LDS and an RM and the older brother of freshman...
as bland as wonder bread.
I agree totally with you. I've had some time in the strips and when i was at...
Advertisements