Medical malpractice happens.  There can be little or no doubt about that.  What is the point to limiting the amount of money that a jury may award to a person or surviving family of a person who proves that he was negligently treated by a health care provider that resulted in injury and sometimes death?  Again - there should be no secret here.  The reason for limiting the amount of money that a jury may award on medical malpractice cases is to save the medical malpractice insurance companies money - at the expense of the very victims who have been most severely injured by the negligence of their insured.  Ordinary people - those that are exposed to medical malpractice by ordinary institutions and physicians every day (and not insurance company executives who have fully funded excellent coverage) are sick of it!

At least they are sick of it in Nevada and Colorado. 

In Nevada KLAS - TV reports "Victims of the hepatitis C scandal are speaking out and urging lawmakers to remove the current limit on how much a patient is awarded in a medical malpractice case." However, "doctors say if that cap is gone, healthcare is thrown out the window." Physicians are concerned that "liability insurance will skyrocket, pushing Nevada doctors out of town, which is what happened several years ago when medical premiums were at a high." However, "on the opposite side of this argument sit dozens of patients whose lives have drastically changed after being infected with hepatitis C due to bad injection practices."

The Reno Gazette reported "A key legislative panel heard emotional testimony from more than a dozen Nevada citizens Monday who feel they have been wronged by Nevada's doctors and medical institutions and want the $350,000 cap removed for pain and suffering damages in medical malpractice lawsuits." Insurers weighed in on the proposed removal of the cap and listed some consequences, such as a "hike in insurance premiums up to 65 percent." While "no action was taken on the bill, more testimony is scheduled to be heard."

The Las Vegas Sun reported "No doctors accused of being involved in the hepatitis C outbreak in Clark County have had their licenses revoked, and that's one reason to lift a limit on medical malpractice judgments, a lawyer says." One of the leaders in the effort to remove the cap on malpractice awards for pain and suffering is lawyer Bill Bradley. He "led a parade of witnesses Monday who told stories -- either first-hand accounts or recounting stories of family members -- of being the victims of malpractice by doctors or hospitals." However, Dr. Rudy Manthei said, "The bad physicians should be dealt with by the medical board."

• MYTH #1: It is easy to file a medical malpractice suit.
• MYTH #2: Statutory caps prevent astronomic awards.
• MYTH #3: Statutory caps are high enough already.
• MYTH #4: Malpractice suits are only filed by greedy people.

Comments (0)

Subscribe to this comment's feed