Bill Rancic Defends His Wife Giuliana After Fashion Police Controversy: 'I Tried to Get Them to Release the Footage' 41 years, 2,191 covers and 55,436 stories from PEOPLE magazine's history for you to enjoy
- VIDEO: Who Made Final Decision On Ice-T and Coco's Upcoming Baby Girl?
- Read the Cover Story: How Blake Shelton Is Moving On After Split
- VIDEO: Watch the Unbreakable Bond Between Mother and Son in New Room Clip
- Jenna Dewan-Tatum Poses Topless for Channing Tatum in Sexy, Fresh-Faced Photo
- Charges Dropped Against Mother Who Allegedly Ran Over Husband With Kids In Backseat
On Newsstands Now
- Matthew McConaughey: In His Own Words
- Jessa Duggar's Wedding Album
- Brittany Maynard's Final Days
Pick up your copy on newsstands
Click here for instant access to the Digital Magazine
People Top 5
LAST UPDATE: Tuesday February 10, 2015 01:10PM EST
PEOPLE Top 5 are the most-viewed stories on the site over the past three days, updated every 60 minutes
- May 12, 1975
- Vol. 3
- No. 18
An H.E.W. Expert Worries About the Malpractice Mess
How do you define malpractice?
Malpractice ought to be called medical liability. It isn't just bad practice.
Why are people now more eager to sue?
People expect perfection nowadays, and it's not always possible. A certain amount of carelessness and negligence does go on in a hospital, but it would simply cost too much to prevent it. And there are medical people who are really malpracticing. They are simply ignorant, callous or careless.
Who are these chronically negligent physicians?
They are doctors who don't see what the other 99 percent of doctors see—a human being. They do things they are not trained to do, performing operations they have no business doing. The careless physician is almost like an accident-prone person. He just can't do the thing right, and he shouldn't be doing it at all.
Can you give an example of a typical malpractice case?
Let's say you have something as simple as a postoperative stitch abscess, caused by an infected suture, let's say, or an organism in the blood. It might keep you in the hospital three weeks extra or out of work for two months. The doctor doesn't explain why it happened, because he has been told by his insurance company to act like nothing has happened. The doctor sloughs it off. Then you talk to your neighbors and finally somebody says, "Why don't you find a good lawyer?" That patient was stupidly handled by his physician.
How should the doctor have acted?
Something went wrong. Maybe it was the doctor's fault, maybe it wasn't. But as soon as he saw it, the doctor should have come to the patient and said, "We're sorry this happened to you. It happens in one out of 100 cases," or "I goofed, but I want to assure you that you're going to be all right, that you're not going to have to pay anything extra for the extra days in the hospital, and that we'll take care of the money you're going to lose by not being able to work." The doctor must show the patient that he is interested and sympathetic, but the insurance company says not to say that. So the patient builds up a resentment toward his doctor.
Why are judgments against doctors so much higher than they used to be?
Sometimes I think a jury is just trying to set a record when they give $4 million to a paraplegic. But the jury gets mad at the doctor, and so does the judge. I would, too. So insurance rates for all doctors go up. In California, for example, they've had 18 judgments and settlements of over $1 million in the past 24 months. This frightens the insurance actuaries, so they want to double, triple and quadruple the premiums.
What are the current rates?
For internists, general practitioners and psychiatrists, the premiums are still very low, usually between $300 to $500 a year. But when you get people who are cutting—performing operations—they jump. In New York premiums for some high-risk doctors will soon be up to $60,000 a year.
Which are the high-risk doctors?
They are those we call the "Group Five"—neurosurgeons, orthopedic surgeons, anesthesiologists, plastic surgeons and obstetricians-gynecologists. For some of these specialists, the premiums already are up to $20,000.
Are the chances of being sued that much greater for this group?
In the case of the obstetrician-gynecologist, you have two lives, and twice the chance of something going wrong. In the case of an orthopedic surgeon, you often get cases referred to you that have not been handled well in the past. If you're a neurosurgeon, well, I've often wondered why the hell any doctor ever goes into it. There have been tremendous improvements in neurosurgery, of course, but there are still patients who are disappointed. Plastic surgeons get women who say after an operation, "You said I'd look like Greta Garbo and I look like one of the Marx Brothers."
And the anesthesiologist?
He's always in the operating room, so no matter who's being sued they usually toss him in the pot.
How much is malpractice costing in terms of national health care?
A staggering amount, and the patient is hardly benefiting at all. We estimate that $4.5 billion is attributable to the malpractice problem nationwide. This includes premiums for insurance, plus the cost of "defensive" medicine—tests and examinations which probably aren't medically necessary, but which are performed by a doctor to protect himself in case a patient should bring suit.
How do these costs break down?
Ten years ago a hospital paid about 10¢ per bed per day for malpractice insurance. Now it's up to at least $2 and in some hospitals as high as $10.
How much do patients in this country wind up collecting from malpractice claims each year?
Around $300 million. There were 18,000 claims closed last year. About half were dropped before getting to court. In about one-quarter of the cases, the insurance companies apparently felt that the doctor was guilty and settled.
Are insurance rates likely to go down in the foreseeable future?
Only if there is something done to prevent a doctor's liability from going on ad infinitum. A doctor can be sued for something he did 20 years ago. In one case, a spastic 19-year-old was talked into suing the obstetrician who delivered him for somehow causing his spastic condition. The case was decided in favor of the doctor. Something must be done to limit the time in which a suit can be started.
What are some ways to handle the overall problem?
This Administration feels solutions ought to be up to the states. I hope states will require insurance companies to form consortiums to sell malpractice insurance. I also support binding arbitration before a panel of doctors, or doctors and lawyers. And there ought to be a limit on awards. I would like to see the lawyers' contingency fee cut to 30% or 40% of the first $100,000 with a scaled down fee after that. Juries also should make the awards for a sum of money annually, instead of a lump sum.
Is there less malpractice in some parts of the country than in others?
There are states, like Idaho or in places outside the big cities, where there are very few malpractice suits. People who live there don't have the same attitude as the New Yorker or the Los Angelino or the Chicagoan. Also, people in some less urban states are in the hands of doctors who know them.
Is the "Marcus Welby" manner that important?
Absolutely. Most suits are against doctors who have only seen the patient a few times and for less than a year. If he's gruff and ignores you, you may look for a reason to sue him.
If you were a doctor starting out in practice, how would you handle the huge malpractice premiums?
I'd consider moving to a state such as Indiana, where the laws are now more reasonable. Then I might put everything in my wife's name and tell my patients that I am practicing without insurance, and that they would have to trust me. But the lawyers would probably get around that one soon.
Treat Yourself! 4 Preview Issues
The most buzzed about stars this minute!