I’ve
spent nearly four decades practicing medicine as an obstetrician,
and I’ve seen firsthand how the cost of medical malpractice insurance
has risen. Among
doctors, malpractice costs truly represent a crisis that threatens
the economic viability of the profession.
There
is no question that medical malpractice lawsuits are out of control
in this country. We’ve
become a society that expects medical care to be guaranteed, that
demands a perfect outcome to every medical procedure.
Mother Nature provides no guarantees however, and things
can go wrong without the slightest negligence by the doctor involved.
Of course some malpractice suits are legitimate, and truly
negligent doctors should pay economic damages.
But far too many suits are filed simply because a patient
is unhappy despite the competent efforts of his doctor, and far
too meritless suits are settled simply to avoid litigation costs.
The result is malpractice premiums that cost doctors tens
of thousands of dollars per year, and increasingly threaten to
put some out of business.
Every
American pays for this not only in the form of much higher medical
costs, but also in countless other ways.
Trauma center doctors have walked off the job in protest. Many doctors feel stressed, unhappy, and unappreciated, which
leads to a declining quality of care.
Most are hesitant to explore new treatments that could
benefit patients because they fear a lawyer will seize on any
deviation from standard practices.
Similarly, patients endure more and more unnecessary and
costly tests ordered by doctors who feel they must explore even
the most unlikely diagnoses.
Worst of all, the best and brightest young people are abandoning
the pursuit of medical careers.
Already faced with years in medical school and daunting
tuition bills, they increasingly understand that malpractice and
economic concerns have damaged the quality of life for doctors.
Many
Americans understandably want Congress to fix the medical malpractice
problem. Yet the
“solution” offered by Congress, namely the federalization of malpractice
law, threatens to do more harm than good.
First and foremost, this approach damages the Constitution
by denying states the right to decide their own local medical
standards and legal rules. Capping liability limits sounds appealing, but it fails to
address the basic problem of too many lawsuits and too many shakedowns,
most of which settle for less than the proposed caps anyway.
The
federal approach also ignores the root cause of the malpractice
crisis: the shift away from treating the doctor-patient relationship
as a contract to viewing it as one governed by federal regulations. The third-party payer system, largely the result of federal
tax laws and the HMO Act of 1973, invites insurance company functionaries,
politicians, government bureaucrats, and trial lawyers into the
equation. This destroys
the patient’s incentive to keep costs down, because he feels he
is part of “the system” and someone else pays the bill.
In other words, the costs of medical care have been socialized,
even though HMOs are ostensibly private businesses.
Yet
the assessment of liability and compensation should be determined
by private contractual agreements between physicians and patients
in other words, by the free market.
The free-market approach enables patients to protect themselves
with “negative outcomes” insurance purchased before medical treatment.
Such insurance ensures that those harmed receive fair compensation,
while reducing the burden of costly malpractice litigation on
the health care system.
Patients receive this insurance payout without having to
endure lengthy lawsuits, and without having to give away a large
portion of their award to a trial lawyer. This also drastically reduces the costs imposed on physicians
and hospitals by malpractice litigation.
I
have introduced legislation that allows individuals a tax credit
for the purchase of negative outcomes insurance. Needless to say,
my bill prohibits the IRS from treating such insurance proceeds
as taxable income. After all, while we don’t need trial lawyers
getting any more insurance money, we certainly don’t need the
IRS getting it either!