|
Malpractice awards in decline not raising malpractice costs { May 25 2005 } Original Source Link: (May no longer be active)
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/05/25/AR2005052500142.htmlhttp://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/05/25/AR2005052500142.html
D.C. Malpractice Awards Decline, New Study Says
Group Decries Williams's Plan to Cap Damages
By Lori Montgomery
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, May 25, 2005; B04
Payments to patients who sue doctors in the District have declined dramatically, even as doctors and politicians have blamed skyrocketing jury awards for driving up the cost of malpractice insurance and driving doctors out of business, according to a study released yesterday.
The analysis by Public Citizen, a nonprofit group that campaigns for consumers' rights, suggests that a proposal by D.C. Mayor Anthony A. Williams (D) to cap court-awarded damages for pain and suffering would do little to ease what doctors say is a malpractice insurance crisis.
According to the study, doctors and their insurance companies paid more than $45 million to plaintiffs and their attorneys as the result of malpractice lawsuits in 2001. By last year, that number had dropped to just under $20 million, the study shows, a reduction of more than 55 percent.
"The mayor, the insurance companies and the medical society are all making jackpot justice claims. They say juries are out of control, payouts are way up, obstetricians are leaving the District and you've got to have limits on jury awards to solve the problem," said Frank Clemente, director of Congress Watch, a division of Public Citizen that monitors federal legislation. "But the study shows those costs are not being driven by the legal system. The mayor ought to get off this hobbyhorse of lawsuits being the problem."
Representatives of local and national medical groups criticized the findings, saying they are based on flawed data from a federal database that does not gather complete information about payments forced by malpractice suits.
"Any study that attempts to come to a conclusion using the National Practitioner Data Bank has to be considered suspect," said Donald J. Palmisano, immediate past president of the American Medical Association.
Clemente defended the data, saying they offer a useful measure of the cost of lawsuits over time.
The study comes three weeks after Williams sent to the D.C. Council a proposal aimed at reducing the high price of malpractice insurance by limiting lawsuits, reducing attorney's fees and capping damages. By protecting doctors and hospitals from frivolous lawsuits and excessive jury awards, Williams said then, the city could reduce the cost of malpractice insurance and keep good doctors from leaving the city.
Nationally, rising insurance rates have prompted similar proposals in numerous states, including Maryland and Virginia, which place certain limits on court-awarded damages. In the District, where there are no limits, "we have the dubious distinction of having the highest premiums in the nation and the highest jury awards in the nation," Williams said at the time.
The Public Citizen study challenges that notion. Its findings show that the total number of malpractice payments has fallen from 55 to 47 in the District since 1991; that the total value of those payments has fallen from $22.1 million to just under $20 million; and that the number of very large jury awards has fallen as well.
Although doctors complain of a surge in multimillion-dollar jury verdicts, the study shows that doctors and their insurance companies made only six payments of more than $1 million in 1991, seven in 2001 and none in 2004.
The study also shows that 91 percent of all malpractice awards last year went to patients who suffered serious injury or death, according to federal records.
"Victims shouldn't have to pay twice here. They've paid once already," Clemente said. "Why should they pay twice by capping their damages?"
Vince Morris, a Williams spokesman, said he has not seen the study. But he questioned its value, saying Public Citizen is "bought and paid for by the trial lawyers," who strongly oppose limits on malpractice awards.
But council member David A. Catania (I-At Large), who has appointed a task force to study the malpractice issue, called the study "an eye opener."
"If claims are declining, then we may need to point the finger at the insurance companies and ask them why these double-digit increases in premiums are necessary," he said.
© 2005 The Washington Post Company
|
|
