AMA Big: An 'awful' tort system

Hat Tip to one of our most vocal readers, Donna Baver Rovito, who pens the Liability Update.  She let us know about an frank interview with the president of the Amer. Medical Assoc. Excerpts:

"The $250,000 (damages) caps that we've passed in the state of California stabilized (medical malpractice) premiums somewhat, but we still have this awful, awful system."

and

"Are we trying to give away money to people who have things happen to them, or are we trying to weed out negligence in care?"

and

"We have a system where 60 percent to 65 percent of the money in the system goes to trial lawyers (and cases are decided by) juries that can't even pronounce the (medical terms), or understand what's going on."

Read it all, here.

Comments

[Matt]

You have to give the AMA credit. They don't slow down on the false statistics.

What I'm curious about is how many physicians still believe the AMA. This is the same AMA that sells your prescription habits to the drug companies, right? Wonder what they're selling to the liability carriers?

[ISMD]

While I, as a physician, have a hard time with the AMA, I frankly would believe them over the false statistics ATLA, or whatever their new cover name is, spews forth to the public.

[Matt]

Which statistics are false?

[Dr. Mary Johnson]

You are not going to "fix" anything about the malpractice tort system in this country until something is done to "fix" medical peer review . . . and to REALLY protect medical whistle-blowers.

The AMA has had its head in the sand on this issue for years. There are growing numbers of physicians out there (including me) who make very good cases arguing that they were retaliated against (either by being fired or "bad-faith" peer reviewed) for reporting bad medical care.

In our increasingly corporatized environment, good doctors are being destroyed by methods worthy of the Salem Witch Trials . . . methods adopted & employed because of the fear of lawyers/lawsuits.