Capping Medical-malpractice Awards

(1) A good deal of publicity has been given to the idea that malpractice litigation awards that are out of control have fostered a crisis in health care and driven physicians out of business because they are forced to pay increased insurance rates. The facts show that argument to be grossly simplistic and misleading. Acknowledging that some premiums can cost nearly $150,000 Crain's Chicago Business reports that the problem is not malpractice awards but other realities of modern medical care (Klein, 2004). Typical annual incomes for obstetricians, for example, have dropped from $350,000 to $250,000 in recent years, but not because of malpractice suits. Instead, insurance companies have capped the fees that they pay doctors, and insurers' s

. . .
$250,000 limit since 1986 (Court, 2004; Toledano, 1999). (2) The argument that malpractice awards have exploded is just not true. Citing statistics from the U.S. Congressional Budget Office, a report on the debate over so-called tort reform in Georgia Trend shows that AMA claims that jury-award increases have caused doctors' malpractice insurance premiums to increase are not reflected in the fact that between 1995 and 2003 the number of successful medical-malpractice cases has been steady. Furthermore, "medical malpractice premiums account for less than 1 percent of national health care costs" (Bowers, 2003, p. 77). The Georgia Trial Lawyers Association cites a 1995 U.S. Department of Justice study showing that plaintiffs were successful in nearly a third of malpractice cases and that, out of 403 victories, 13, or 3.2%, involved punitive damages. Of those, four cases involved awards of more than $250,000 (Bowers, 2003). The facts do not bear out claims by insurers or doctors, who are (1) guilty of the logical fallacy post hoc, ergo propter hoc, claiming that premiums rose and that therefore excessive awards caused that, or (2) arguing in bad faith altogether. (3) If malpractice awards were capped the integrity of the justice sy
. . .

Some common words found in the essay are:
Department Justice, , Chicago Business, America Washington, John Rawls, Security Act, Retrieved June, Trend AMA, Consumer Rights, James Durham, malpractice awards, access justice, bowers 2003, malpractice litigation, medical care, health care, retrieved june, medical malpractice, medical-malpractice awards, so-called tort reform, toledano 1999, crain's chicago business, cap malpractice awards,
Approximate Word count = 1405
Approximate Pages = 6 (250 words per page)