Medical Malpractice Caps Hurt Patients

Staff Writer

Contributor

0 CommentsPrint ArticleSubscribe

Medical malpractice lawyers all over the country are in the fight of their lives. Many states have already implemented caps on non-economic damages in medical malpractice cases. The public sees the battle as doctors vs. lawyers since that is the way it's portrayed in political ads. However, many people fail to think about one of the main players - the malpractice insurance companies. Imagine a person with a low income who is injured due to the negligence of a surgeon: That person may suffer horribly but not have many economic damages. Caps also keep many worthy cases out of the courtroom because they are very expensive to pursue.

Janice Eisen, a freelance writer from Wisconsin, provides a great column about caps on medical malpractice cases. She notes that the state of Oklahoma passed caps in 2003, yet one malpractice insurer has raised malpractice premiums 125% since then. The following excerpt is quite telling:

Limiting the rights of injured patients does not lower doctors' premiums. When malpractice insurers claim that huge damage awards are the cause of soaring premiums, they are lying. Insurers escape responsibility for rising malpractice rates while injured patients, lawyers and doctors take the blame.

A study of the 15 largest medical malpractice insurers in the country, based on the 2004 annual statements they filed with state insurance departments, showed that over the past five years, the amount collected in premiums has more than doubled, while payouts for claims have remained all but flat. They increased premiums by 21 times the increase in claims payouts.

Amazing.