Outside View: Rx for reform
The following editorial appeared Friday in the Everett Herald.
Maybe we are a nation of hypochondriacs. Or maybe we’re a nation with many citizens who too often think they are one big lawsuit away from riches and retirement. Maybe we’re a little of both.
Regardless, a recent Harvard School of Public Health analysis found that about 40 percent of the medical malpractice cases filed in the United States are groundless. Completely groundless – as in there was no evidence that a medical error was committed or that the patient suffered any injury.
The research found that the vast majority of bogus cases were dismissed with no payout to the patient. But such lawsuits still accounted for 15 percent of the money paid out in settlements or verdicts.
Such findings brought two diagnoses: The study’s lead researcher said the numbers challenge the view among tort reform supporters that the legal system is riddled with frivolous claims that lead to exorbitant payouts.
The American Medical Association, meanwhile, said the findings show a substantial number of meritless claims continue to slip through and force doctors to waste time defending them and that caps are needed on malpractice awards.
The arguments serve as a good reminder that the Washington Legislature, led by Gov. Chris Gregoire, took the first sound steps during the last session toward compromise on medical liability reform after the nasty and expensive campaigns for the ill-fated initiatives 330 and 336. The agreement encourages settlements before malpractice cases ever go to trial, but also sets up a review of claims by appropriate medical professionals in an effort to avoid frivolous lawsuits.
The Harvard researchers may not think the system is riddled with frivolous lawsuits, but we agree with the AMA that 40 percent is too many, and they do burden the system, even when there is no payout.
Perhaps a penalty for filing a frivolous suit might help some patients have more respect for the law. Getting those numbers down would put the focus where it should be: punishing and/or weeding out the small percentage of doctors who harm patients.
The state’s compromise allows apologies made by doctors that occur within 30 days of a medical error’s discovery to be inadmissible in court. Currently, fear of being sued may keep some doctors from telling a patient they’re sorry. Studies show that when doctors make such an apology, they are less likely to be sued.
As corny and simple and lawyer-averse as it sounds, what the ultra-complicated medical reform debate really needs is a healthy dose of respect for one another, and the law.
Except in cases of true harm, go and sue no more.