The Legal Examiner Mark The Legal Examiner Mark The Legal Examiner Mark search twitter facebook feed linkedin instagram google-plus avvo phone envelope checkmark mail-reply spinner error close
Skip to main content

Across the nation, the U S Chamber is running frivolous radio ads that call for people to contact their congressperson and ask for tort reform. They set the ad up as a boxing match. Aren’t these the same people that attack lawyers for running ads like this? Aren’t these the people that are funded by the Insurance companies?

Listen to the ad. They want to continue to set the argument up as between the Doctors and the Lawyers. It’s from the Bush/Rove book of attack the lawyers. That strategy has worked well for them to hid their true intentions. The fight has always been a fight between the Insurance companies and those that are injured by negligent practices. A real healthcare bill cuts into the Heath Insurance comapanies profits.

The U S Chamber is lying about the cost savings. They are lying about the goal that they want to achieve. They are just plain lying about the made up support for tort reform. Why in the world shouldn’t the call be for a fair health care system? One that covers people and still protects their constitutional rights? Because, that isn’t what they want.


  1. Gravatar for Chirstopher

    I will not pretend I have all of the answers. I will leave that to folks who are smarter than I am. I do know that just the threat of getting sued plays a huge role in how physicians conduct themselves on a day to day basis. With today's medicolegal climate, when I go to work and see a fairly routine patient with a fairly routine complaint, I am much more inclined to order a $10,000 work-up to get a 99% diagnosis, than to spend $200 to get a 97% diagnosis. Knowing that there are dozens of malpractice attorneys around the corner salivating to get their hands on me. Knowing full well, that although I may be innocent of any wrong doing, I may be tied up in court for years and that a judgement may be settled out of court because it is cheaper than actually defending myself. This is 'lawsuit lotto', and the attorneys know this. They will tell you that they are protecting patient's rights, yet take 60% or more of any award. Make no mistake, I agree with compensating a person who is a victim of gross negligence, however, the trial lawyers have the current system rigged and flood Congress with money to keep it that way.

    Shine it up any way you want, but it still stinks.

  2. Gravatar for Mike Bryant

    I appreciate you taking the time to read and comment. It sounds like you are a doctor, so they are getting the Doctor vs Lawyer fight they want. But, you are using faulty numbers. The 60% number that the lawyer gets is wrong, unless you are figuring the defense lawyer and the Insurance costs. I find your diagnosis comparison interesting and would like to see you expand on that: What test cost 9,800 more and gave you so much less information? Have you ever saved a life as a result of that test? Was it medically ethical for you to do that unneeded test? Who got the extra $9,800? These questions need to be asked before we can accept that this really takes place.

    We have a low number of cases in Minnesota, Low Insurance rates and a great system with no caps. That is a system that works for the consumer.

  3. Gravatar for Christopher

    Mr. Bryant,

    Thank you for your response. I may have been a little loose with my figures. I really did not expect a response. I can tell you there is real fear in the medical community. I see all types of people. Often with very little information and very limited time to take a detailed history and physical. Many of these patients often have a variety of vague and diffuse complaints involving different organ systems and anatomic regions. For instance, somebody walks into clinic off of the street complaining of acute back pain, and on review notes a little neck pain, and some non-specific chest pains and an occasional headache. Now I may suspect a lower back sprain, order L-Spine films and send the patient home with ibuprophen and orders to take it easy for several days. But there is real pressure to order all of the labs, blood work and expensive imaging to cover all of the bases. Knowing full well that the probability of finding something is slim. Yet, god forbid, I miss that rare malignancy, anyeursm or active coronary artery disease. Now imagine that all of that additional cost multiplied by the 20-30 patients per day.

  4. Gravatar for Mike Bryant

    The real pressure that you write about I can understand but what is it from: 1) the amount of work that is expected 2) The profit margins for the higher ups or 3) from the fear of a lawsuit? I talk to hundreds of people that are mistreated at hospitals who have no claim because they have no long term damages. The problem was later fixed, it was short term, or it was minor overall with the medicals being paid. So I don't see that we take any where near the number of cases that are suggested.

    I also found interesting your use of "God Forbid" and wonder for how many that is the fear of someone dieing or the fear of actually being a part of someone dieing or really the consequences that come from being the cause?

    For the patient and their family I would bet they would never like to be a part of any of those answers. Some of what you talk about is what I understand to be the differential diagnosis, if it isn't I go back to my original questions of why do the extra tests? and have the tests found some of the cast of horrors you bring up?

Comments are closed.

Of Interest