The U. S. House of Representatives passed a Medical Malpractice Reform Bill, H.R. 1215, on June 28, 2017. It is called the “Protecting Access to Care Act of 2017.”
It is simply a rehash of the same old reform acts that state legislatures have been passing for decades.
The Bill’s title is deceptive. It does not address “Access to Care.”
It will do nothing to reduce the costs of defensive medicine.
In reality, it does nothing new to free physicians and surgeons from the burdens that they are subject to as a result of medical malpractice litigation.
There is no attempt at innovation.
An outline of an appropriate way to reform medical malpractice liability can be found at this link: medical malpractice reform. I have been presenting it to Congress for years. Take a look and see if this makes sense to you.
H.R. 1215 seems to be a way to appease the medical malpractice trial lawyers. In my opinion, it is not meant to appease physicians and surgeons.
It is very important that you contact your U. S. Senators and tell them that you want real reform and not just a Bill that is nothing more than a continuation of the past.
H.R. 1215 does little to nothing for the statute of limitations.
Statute of limitations are to be 1) three years from the date of occurrence of the breach, 2) three years from the date medical treatment is completed, and 3) one year after the injured party discovers the injury which, in the case of a minor, may be extended to the minor’s eight birthday.
The Bill does not preempt state law concerning a state’s statute of limitations.
H.R. 1215 places limits on patient damages. They are:
A cap of $250,000.00 on non-economic damages regardless of the number of parties against whom the action is brought or the number of claimants in the action.
So, we have a 25 page Bill that does little to nothing to change the way medical malpractice lawsuits will be litigated.
Presently, at least thirty three states have medical malpractice award caps. Defensive medicine has not been reduced by these caps.
Non-economic damages cover physical and emotional pain, suffering, inconvenience, physical impairment, mental anguish, disfigurement, loss of enjoyment of life, loss of society and companionship, loss of consortium (other than loss of domestic service), hedonic damages, injury to reputation, and all other non-pecuniary losses of any kind.
The Bill allows unlimited actual economic damages.
Economic damages covers past and future medical expenses, loss of past and future earnings, cost of obtaining domestic services, loss of employment, and loss of business or employment opportunities.
H.R. Bill 1215 places limits on contingency fees paid to attorneys. This is not new. States currently have limits. H. R. 1215’s limits are:
1) Forty percent for the first $50,000 recovered by claimant.
2) Thirty-three and one-third percent of the next $50,000.00.
3) Twenty-five percent of the next $500,000.00.
4) Fifteen percent of any amount in excess of $600,000.00.
The attorneys are actually treated very well under H. R. 1215.
H.R. 1215’s limits on contingency fees will not have any impact on reducing defensive medicine or reducing the litigation burdens facing physicians and surgeons.
One section of the Bill does limit the liability for prescribers of medications that have been “approved, licensed, or cleared by the Food and Drug Administration.” They cannot be named as a party to a product liability action against the manufacturer, distributer or seller of the product.
The Bill also addresses procedural issues concerning expert witnesses, notice of intent to commence a lawsuit and affidavits of merit. But, these are similar to the limitations presently placed on medical malpractice litigation by most states.
So, we have a 25 page Bill that does little to nothing to change the way medical malpractice lawsuits will be litigated.
The Bill does not lesser the physician’s burden of exposure to malpractice litigation.
Without doing this there will be no reduction in defensive medicine costs.
You cannot have realistic healthcare reform without reducing defensive medicine costs.
At best, H. R. 1215 is a lazy attempt at medical malpractice reform and indicates that the Republican party is out of touch with the realities of healthcare and the needs of the American people, physicians and surgeons.
At worst, it is simply a another con job on the medical community and people of America.
