Medical Malpractice
Chicago Tribune, 09/15/2009By Robert A. Clifford
In response to the editorial "Doctors and Lawyers," I take issue with describing our court system, which responds to the medical profession's errors in the only way it can -- damages -- as "jackpot justice." An Illinois case challenging the constitutionality of the damage cap is pending. As previously held by the Illinois Supreme Court, a one-size-fits-all cap is unconstitutional and damages are only properly determined by a jury.
So-called "independent health experts" are not superior to our constitutional right to have cases decided by our fellow citizen jurors. The reason that the health-care bills in Congress do not address medical malpractice premiums is that they account for an estimated 0.6 percent of health-care costs.
With a $2.5 trillion price-tag for health expenses this year in this country, the larger picture must be addressed in improving the quality of health care, which itself will reduce medical malpractice.
The Tribune inaccurately attributes credit for the competition in the malpractice insurance industry to the cap, when the truth, according to the Illinois Department of Insurance and others, is that insurance competition increased due to the 2005 insurance reforms.
And it is only the competitors of ISMIE Mutual, the state's largest insurer of doctors, that are providing premium relief to the doctors.
The "doctor exodus" ended despite the fact that even though the damages cap was passed four years ago, ISMIE has had the arrogance to continue to charge essentially the same excessive premiums it was charging before, with a token one-time return to its policyholders of a paltry $20 million out of the hundreds of millions ISMIE charges every year.
