“It’s GD’s fault because his insurance company chose not to gamble on a potentially-sympathetic jury?”

No, it’s his fault for not reading his policy and making sure he had the right to object to a settlement.

” still not seen you condemn the name-every-doc-on-the-chart-to-get-more-money gambit, nor have I seen you condemn the legal extortion from the patient who got herself hurt for failing to take the proferred medical advice.”

Unlike you, I don’t think I know all the facts of a case because I’ve heard one relatively brief side of the story. Having dealt with many, many insurers in my life, I can tell you they don’t hand out large sums of money without some liability. They do their own internal assessments of cases, with their own experts, and they usually adequately assess the risk. So I’d bet there is a LITTLE more to the story than just Grunt’s version. For example, perhaps the neurosurgeon pointed the finger at everyone else. Well, if he is going to do that, the attorney has a duty to file suit against those parties as they may well be responsible. Just like you can’t diagnose a disease based on one paragraph generally, you typically can’t diagnose malpractice based on that little info either.

“I’m looking at 70K in malpractice premiums this year… now go compare that to the average ER doc’s income.”

Who is your carrier? What state are you in? What’s your income? You’re eager to tell me your expenses, but you don’t want to tell anything else. Donald Trump’s insurance bill is probably $10 million or more. If I only knew that about him, should I feel terribly sympathetic?

“Unethical plaintiff’s attorneys that take such nonsense cases are nothing but hired assassins assisting in legal armed robbery for a cut of the loot. I’m sorry you don’t like that, but it’s true.”

Considering that you know literally nothing about 99% of all cases filed, your opinion on the subject is, shall we say, lacking a sound basis. Have you ever even dealt with an insurance company? You do know how they work, don’t you? You don’t “steal” anything from them. The vast majority of the time you work for everything you get. Do you really think people with large med mal awards WANT them? That they wouldn’t rather have their health back? Do you know what kind of injury it takes to have a million dollar case usually? I bet you wouldn’t trade places with many of them for the benefits of their “armed robbery”.

“All of the docs here acknowledge that malpractice does occur, but there’s more than one victim in many malpractice cases. ”

As do I. Althought I will dispute the level of “victimhood”. And I know that you know malpractice does occur, I just don’t think you appreciate how often and how hard it is for the victim to get compensation for it so they can even pay the money back into the healthcare system for their future care. Do you think the games insurers play with your reimbursement don’t happen anywhere else?

“You’re such a caricature it’s hilarious.”

Pot, meet kettle. Seriously, though, I would be happy if you would just educate yourself on what it’s like for the victim of malpractice to be faced with a stonewalling doctor and hospital, an insurer who won’t pay regardless, mounting medical bills and daily living expenses, and the loss of function caused by the injury, and stop trying to make it even harder for them to get what is rightfully owed to them.

Because I know you don’t believe it, but it could very easily be you in their place. And no, the insurer isn’t going to treat you any differently.

Unless I know what you do with all your time, I have no idea. You may golf every Wednesday, or spend three weeks in Vail every Christmas. If you miss those times, then no, I don’t think you are out any out of pocket expenses.

“5% must be a negligible amount to someone who takes 33-50% from his clients, but to most of us it is significant.”

If by “takes” you mean earns that much as a result of the work he did, I guess you’re correct. But your comparison doesn’t make much sense. As for the 5% figure, it came from the CME, during their ’03 or ’04 debate on reimbursement rates. The discussion transcript is online.

Actually, they take between 1/3 and 1/2 depending on the contract and the stage of litigation. Why do you sympathize then? Were you not sympathizing when your carrier was shutting them out regardless of merit?

Irrelevant… GD’s insurance situation does not change the fact that the patient chose poorly, and had a bad outcome… nobody to blame but herself, and the lawyer who took that case undoubtedly knew that. She shouldn’t be demonized for pulling a courtroom stickup (with her attorney as the getaway driver)? Her attorney shouldn’t be demonized for roping in every physician he could to increase his payout, regardless of whether they did anything wrong?

It’s GD’s fault because his insurance company chose not to gamble on a potentially-sympathetic jury?

*spit*

I’ve still not seen you condemn the name-every-doc-on-the-chart-to-get-more-money gambit, nor have I seen you condemn the legal extortion from the patient who got herself hurt for failing to take the proferred medical advice.

I know, I know… it’s all about the noble “getting money for the poor injured plaintiff” meme for you, because you come back to that every single time. It’s your fig leaf.

I can understand the motivation of people trying to get money to cover their expenses (and compensate for future uninsurability)… but I don’t have to like it, particularly when they try to shift the responsibility onto me. That’s a personal affront, and a huge financial cost to everyone involved. Unethical plaintiff’s attorneys that take such nonsense cases are nothing but hired assassins assisting in legal armed robbery for a cut of the loot. I’m sorry you don’t like that, but it’s true.

Your lack of candor about your own financial affairs while chastising everyone else is revealing. The facts are that the cost of a physician’s malpractice insurance is typically less than 5% of their overhead.

Irrelevant… but nice insinuation, Matt… *golf clap* I’m looking at 70K in malpractice premiums this year… now go compare that to the average ER doc’s income.

All of the docs here acknowledge that malpractice does occur, but there’s more than one victim in many malpractice cases. The fact that you can never seem to acknowledge that (your “lack of candor”) tells everyone here everything they need to know about you.

I love you, Matt… please don’t ever go away. You’re such a caricature it’s hilarious.

“When you get a traffic ticket, even if you think it is unjust, should you be compensated by the police for having to fight it?”

Who said that I should be? When I get a traffic ticket, I suffer out-of pocket expenses too, just like in a malpractice suit. You are attempting to change the subject by claiming that we think we should be compensated for our expenses. Obviously then, you must agree that we do in fact suffer out-of-pocket expenses from lawsuits, but you haven’t bothered to admit it yet.

I might as well dispute your other assertion that since malpractice premiums represent a small percentage of our “overhead” that everything is just fine and dandy. “Cost of doing business” and all that. 5% must be a negligible amount to someone who takes 33-50% from his clients, but to most of us it is significant. I’ll dispute the 5% number while I’m at it. Do you have references for that number?

I’m starting to wonder if you can read. I acknowledged the error in that statement, but of course it appears since you have no control over your insurance policy perhaps you don’t pay the premiums at all.

The reason you don’t want to say is the reason physicians in this debate always only want to talk about everyone else’s financial interest. Your lack of candor about your own financial affairs while chastising everyone else is revealing. The facts are that the cost of a physician’s malpractice insurance is typically less than 5% of their overhead.

“#4: Go after a different commenter about ephemera (‘vacation tee-times’).”

The commenter is asking for reimbursement for lost time. We’re discussing why he should or should not get paid by people who have no control over the process. Sorry you don’t understand but that doesn’t mean it’s not a relevant discussion.

The only strawman being presented here is yours, where you blame the injured patient and their lawyer because you didn’t read your insurance policy. And because the party who had committed malpractice wouldn’t step up to the plate.

The only “underlying injustice” is that you would arbitrarily limit the value of a case you’ve never heard the facts on to (hopefully) save a few dollars on your malpractice premiums.

It’s 1/3 to 1/2 of the total cut or they can hire someone hourly. Why, what should it be based on your experience with the complexity of the case, the hours involved, and the financial risk to the attorney?

And why would that diminish how bad you feel for the plaintiff? It’s not like they want to have to go to an attorney.

There’s a reason, CJD, that I don’t tell you the actual numbers of my medmal cost and my income, and it’s because it will never matter to you, you don’t care; it’s just fodder for the never-ending arguing machine, with some class-envy thrown in for your entertainment.

Besides, you’ll just explain it away, or ‘gee the plaintiff doesn’t make that’, or somesuch which completely a) ignores the underlying injustice and b) is a fun straw man to attack.

Oh, my other suits were pure jackpot-chasing crap, and were dismissed with prejudice.

In the case that GD describes…he made the correct diagnosis and the patient then sees 6 doctors and refuses the advice of a neurosurgeon and a bad outcome occurs. The patient sues, and then the plaintiff’s lawyer realizes that the neurosurgeon’s insurance won’t pay as much as they would like, so they nab the 6 other doctors who had seen this woman relating to this diagnosis.

But the patient personally decided to reject the surgery.

I’m sorry, but if I ever decline to have a surgery that a neurosurgeon tells me that I absolutely must have, and then something bad happens….whose fault is it? I’m pretty sure that it would be my fault for deciding to just decline the surgery against heavy recommendation – even though it isn’t my fault in the first place for getting sick. I mean, what’s a neurosurgeon to do? Get a restraining order and force the patient to undergo brain surgery against their will? Is that the only thing that would stop the madness in this case?

Somebody enlighten me because I don’t get it. If a doc recommends a life-saving treatment and the patient refuses but then something bad happens, I don’t see how anybody else can be at fault except for the patient for declining. (And even then, I probably wouldn’t say patient fault…but rather, NOT physician fault) We’re still a society of free will and even though we don’t know the entire case (which I’m sure will be brought up by the other side to dispute my entire post here), it sounds as if the woman was of sound mind. To me, the entire thing sounds like she was out for gold. And no, she didn’t fake her condition just to get rich. Probably didn’t even refuse the neurosurgery in order to get rich. But she did refuse and something bad happened and she saw an opportunity to go in for the kill.

Yes, I empathize very heavily with patients. I even feel badly for that particular patient as I’m sure she went through a great deal. But worthy of a lawsuit? Based on the information presented, I don’t see how….

Take care,
Carrie