Articles Posted in Medical Malpractice News

We start the year off with an article from Chattahbox.com. I’ve never heard of it. But this website reports on a new survey conducted by Columbia University’s Institute on Medicine that found 49% of doctors have witnessed serious medical mistakes conducted by another health care provider but refused to report it.

Troubling, but nothing earth-shattering. Similar statistics have been floating around. But what is compelling is the second paragraph of the article:

This shocking statistic shows the way our overly litigious society has effected the way that doctors operate, as well as the level of trust patients can put on their doctors, knowing that they are not likely to be truthful about mistakes of those in their office, much less their own.

Four Massachusetts doctors are asking that a wrongful death lawsuit against them be dismissed because the claim should be handled as a medical malpractice claim. The family of a man who killed in a motor vehicle accident claims these doctors failed to warn the at-fault drive that her medication may have rendered her unable to drive. Defendants in the case ask that it be reviewed by a medical malpractice tribunal consistent with a medical malpractice case.
This claim would not fly in Maryland under a new case decided this year. (The name escapes me.)

The Illinois Supreme Court heard oral arguments yesterday from malpractice lawyers in three cases challenging the Illinois limit on caps in medical malpractice cases. Earlier this year, a trial court ruled that the law violates the separation clause of the Constitution. The Maryland Court of Appeals is also expected to soon hear arguments as to whether Maryland cap on non-economic damages is valid under Maryland’s constitution.

This CNN.com article is a little old, but it is an interesting story of one doctor’s struggle to find a medical malpractice lawyer to bring a medical malpractice lawsuit against her doctor.

No one talks about this tragedy: victims who cannot bring a malpractice lawsuit only because the economics of medical malpractice cases do not allow lawyers to take cases where the injuries are not extreme.

The article includes a very poorly worded quote from medical malpractice lawyer: “What are her losses — maybe $50,000? I can’t afford to take a case that recovers $50,000. My expenses would likely be more than the recovery. She’s out of luck.” True statement, I guess. Awful way to put it.

In a series of articles, the Irish Independent underscores that the varying quality of radiologists in detecting breast cancer varies wildly from hospital to hospital is not a uniquely Maryland or American phenomenon. A radiologist investing what appears to be a breast cancer misdiagnosis epidemic in some hospitals in Ireland found after reviewing 3,000 mammograms that the breast cancer misdiagnosis rate at Portlaoise Hospital was six times higher than in the best hospitals in Ireland. Apparently, the breast cancer misdiagnosis rate at this hospital was 6% which is ridiculously high.

This underscores how important it is to have radiologists who know how to properly read mammograms and have equipment that gives you the best possible reading.

The following are a few breast cancer misdiagnosis verdicts and settlements:

I saw California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger on Meet the Press shortly after Tim Russert’s death. I’ve never been a huge fan but his moderate views and understanding of the complexity of the issues facing California were fairly impressive. (Was the bar set low?)

Anyway, the Terminator is on the wrong side of insurance reimbursements for doctors in California. His administration intends to appeal an appeals court ruling from last week, halting a 10% reduction in Medi-Cal reimbursement rates to doctors.

I realize that we have a problem with this country with entitlements. But if you are of the mindset that we have to reduce entitlements, we have to do it head-on as opposed to nickel and diming doctors.

I found a Maryland Law Review article today that discusses what precipitated the birth Medical Mutual, the insurance company that insurers most Maryland doctors.

In 1974, the malpractice carrier for eighty-five percent was not Medical Mutual but St. Paul who informed doctors that because the Insurance Commissioner had refused the commissioner’s request to increase medical malpractice insurance rates, it would stop selling new malpractice policies in Maryland.

In response, the General Assembly created the Medical Mutual to provide malpractice insurance to Maryland health care providers. I had no idea that a previous “malpractice crisis” (in quotes because I’m always skeptical) spawned Medical Mutual while I was in elementary school.

In a medical malpractice trial in Pittsburgh, the jury found that the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center at Shadyside’s care of the Plaintiff was both medical negligence and that it was the cause of the death of a man. The jury awarded $2.5 million under the Pennsylvania Wrongful Death Act. They gave no damages under the Pennsylvania Survival Act.

Incredibly, the jury issued a statement as to why: “After eight days of testimony in the case of Rettger v. UPMC Shadyside, it is the unanimous opinion of the jury that no amount of damages will adequately punish UPMC. It is our belief that UPMC Shadyside’s policies, culture, and lack of competent supervision resulted in the death [of the decedent].”

The plaintiffs now seek a new trial because they had evidence to show that the decedent’s lost earning capacity was between $4 million and $15 million.