Do you want Govt Health Care?

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

part of the cost of healthcare goes to pay for malpractice insurance, which in turn goes to pay awards and settlements. many times cases are settled even when standard of care has been met simply because its cheaper than going to trial and winning. i would be interested to what percentage of the cost of healthcare goes towards lawyers, settlement, and awards.

Likewise, I'd be interested to know how much money is 'saved' by ignoring proper practices and accepted a certain number of botched procedures and out of court settlements.

It's hard to pick which is more galling - the people who sue doctors after a rough child birth or other non ideal outcome that is beyond medical control OR that people who really got hurt by doctor neglect have to fight tooth and nail to get made whole. (as if money makes up for the opportunity cost of the error)

[TrophyHusband 0]

i wouldn't be surprised if the out of court settlements accounted for an even larger amount of money than court awards.

"Your scrotum is quite nice" - Skymama
www.kjandmegan.com

[freethefly 6]

Quote

while you may be right, it stops a whle lot of lawsuits when there are no deep pockets to go after. i'm not sure how the community property thing works. if only we had a lawyer from california that could clear it up for us.

part of the cost of healthcare goes to pay for malpractice insurance, which in turn goes to pay awards and settlements. many times cases are settled even when standard of care has been met simply because its cheaper than going to trial and winning. i would be interested to what percentage of the cost of healthcare goes towards lawyers, settlement, and awards.

This is interesting;
http://judiciary.senate.gov/testimony.cfm?id=1292&wit_id=3777
As is this;
http://cgood.org/healthcare-reading-cgpubs-speeches-19.html
In the latter, it states that 33% to 40% goes to the attorney.
From the latter link;
Nor does the system work well from the standpoint of the injured patient. First, as Professor Sage has observed, it is hard to get a lawyer unless the claim is worth at least several hundred thousand dollars.[13] Next, the litigation drags on for years for injured patients as well as for doctors. It is probably accurate to suggest that the system favors whoever is in the wrong--they gain an advantage merely by threatening to drag the other side through interminable proceedings. Most shocking is the cost-- the injured plaintiff typically pays 33 to 40 percent of any award or settlement to lawyers.[14] Over half the total cost of the malpractice system-- $15-17 billion out of $28 billion -- goes to lawyers and administrative costs.

"...And once you're gone, you can't come back
When you're out of the blue and into the black."
Neil Young

[TrophyHusband 0]

"Limits on non-economic damages: The HEALTH Act limits the amount a plaintiff could receive for pain and suffering to $250,000. "

getting this act passed, is a very important step that can easily be taken to reduce costs of healthcare. george bush used to pay a lot of lip service to getting this passed, but the democrats were staunchly against it. they claimed that it took away peoples' right to sue, which clearly it does not, and said it would allow bad doctors to continue practicing with no consequences. obviously these claims are false, but those were the arguements against it i remember hearing.

i would think that the women's rights groups would be all over this since since access to women's health care is directly impacted. many areas are seeing an exodus of ob/gyn's because of the rising cost of malpractice insurance, or they just refuse to deliver babies and only do gynecology.

"Your scrotum is quite nice" - Skymama
www.kjandmegan.com

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

while you may be right, it stops a whle lot of lawsuits when there are no deep pockets to go after. i'm not sure how the community property thing works. if only we had a lawyer from california that could clear it up for us.

I'm a lawyer from California. I cut my teeth doing medical malpractice law. I now devote about 1/2 of my practice to family law.

As far as community property - YUP. The wife is part fo the community, so she's on the hook, too. If the doctor transferred everything to someone else for no value, then the transfer can be set aside as a fraudulent conveyance to escape a creditor.

Still, these are all troubles that a plaintiffs' lawyer doesn't want to deal with. Insurance usually means that the plaintiffs' lawyer will get paid promptly without having to go out and collect the judgment.

There is the doctrine of a person who is "judgment proof." Get a $100k judgment against a doctor? It might as well be $100 million, cause you ain't getting it.

Well, let's say you've got that $100k judgment and the doctor has a $2.5 million estate on the bluffs. So you record an abstract of judgment on the propert and get paid when the property sells. Well, it's gonna suck if the doctor never sells the house. Judgments are good for ten years and can be renewed once for another ten years. After that its done.

Or, you can try to garnish the doctor's wages. That works, but you'll get little bits of money throughout that might not be enough in the short run to cover the expenses.

That's why Bill Booth changed the name of his business from the "Relative Workshop" to the "Uninsured Relative Workshop." It had the benefit of getting lawyers to think twice about lawsuits.


There are plenty of doctors and lawyers who prefer now to "go bare."

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[Rookie120 0]

Quote

i would be interested to what percentage of the cost of healthcare goes towards lawyers, settlement, and awards.

Go ask John Edwards. I'm sure he has a round-a-bout figure.

If you find yourself in a fair fight, your tactics suck!

[Rookie120 0]

Quote

That's why Bill Booth changed the name of his business from the "Relative Workshop" to the "Uninsured Relative Workshop." It had the benefit of getting lawyers to think twice about lawsuits.

BRILLIANT!!!!!!!! Bill kicks ass.

If you find yourself in a fair fight, your tactics suck!

[freethefly 6]

Quote

Quote

i would be interested to what percentage of the cost of healthcare goes towards lawyers, settlement, and awards.

Go ask John Edwards. I'm sure he has a round-a-bout figure.

The lawyer takes 33% to 40% of any settlement. Quite lucrative. One way to cut down on lawsuits would be to cap the amount that an attorney can take at maybe(?) 5 to 10%.

"...And once you're gone, you can't come back
When you're out of the blue and into the black."
Neil Young

[Rookie120 0]

Quote

The lawyer takes 33% to 40% of any settlement. Quite lucrative. One way to cut down on lawsuits would be to cap the amount that an attorney can take at maybe(?) 5 to 10%.

With most of the lawmakers being lawyers I find it highly unlikely that they would do that.

If you find yourself in a fair fight, your tactics suck!

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

Limits on non-economic damages: The HEALTH Act limits the amount a plaintiff could receive for pain and suffering to $250,000. "

California has the Medical Injury Compensation Relief Act of 1975 (MICRA). See, in the early 1970's, medical malpractice insurance rates raged out of control - I think they climbed over 300% within a couple of years. So what happened was that doctors either couldn't get insurance or couldn't afford it. Thus, doctors in California were retiring or moving and the costs of health care were climbing, leaving it less affordable for the public.

So the governor (Jerry Brown) called a special session of the Legislature to deal with what was, at the time, an actual crisis. California politicians thought that it's not good to have a shortage of doctors in California. (Hardest hit were obstetrics, neuroligist and emergency room physicians).

So they passed MICRA, which:
1) Limited pain and suffering damages to $250k;
2) Placed NO limits on economic expenses (like future care, medical treatment, etc.);
3) Limited contingent attorney fees on a sliding scalel
4) Provides for election of periodic future payments; and
5) Requires advance notice of malpractice claims (so that the cases can be settled earlier).

The impact was huge. And it remains huge. Obviously, part of the reason is that the pateints - not the attorneys - receive the lion's share of the award, meaning that attorneys only take cases that are appropriate.

Personally, the $250,000 limits are 1975 limits. I think that they should be increased.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[kallend 2,150]

Quote

Why is it silly? If a healthy person is paying more in premiums than they use in services, then where is the rest of the money going? Over the past 30 years I have paid way more in health insurance premiums than I have gotten back in actual care.

So you're upset because you haven't gotten terribly sick or injured?

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

The lawyer takes 33% to 40% of any settlement.

That's standard. But in California, MICRA has limited that somewhat. In California, for any action against a healthcare provider, the lawyer may recover:
1) 40% of the first 50k ($20k);
2) 33.333 of the next $50k ($16,666.67)
3) 25% of the next $500k ($125k)
4) 15% of anything over $600k.

So if a verdict is for 2.1 million, the lawyer may receive: 1) $20k + $16,667.67+ 125, or 161666.67 for the first 600k, and $225k for the remainder, totaling $386,666.67 in fees (assuming the 2.1 million is paid in a lump sum).

So he'd get a total of about 18.4 percent.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

The lawyer takes 33% to 40% of any settlement. Quite lucrative. One way to cut down on lawsuits would be to cap the amount that an attorney can take at maybe(?) 5 to 10%.

Which would greatly diminish the ability of the poor to get legal representation. Or even the middle class. Contigency attorneys take on cases knowing only some of them will pay.

As for a 250k limit on pain and suffering...

How much money would compensate you for never being able to skydive again, if caused by someone's malpractice? How much if you could never walk again? Have sex again? Sure you can get some level of lost wages, but most of us see our life as more than just collecting a paycheck.

[TrophyHusband 0]

has MICRA lowered health insurance premiums or are californians paying for the rest of the country? has it improved access to healthcare? in your opinion, would this or the HEALTH act be good for the nation to adopt? do you have any insight as to the real reason there is so much resistance to this at the national level?

"Your scrotum is quite nice" - Skymama
www.kjandmegan.com

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

has MICRA lowered health insurance premiums or are californians paying for the rest of the country?

It has. California is not a bad place to practice medicine. As far as the rest of the country, no. Look at what happened a couple of years ago in West Virginia, I believe. There was basically beginning an exodus of doctors.

Quote

has it improved access to healthcare?

Yes, because doctors stuck around and moved to California. In the early 70's, doctors were leaving - which is not good for healthcare access.

Quote

in your opinion, would this or the HEALTH act be good for the nation to adopt?

I think it would be good for all 50 states to adopt as a uniform law. I don't like the thought of the feds doing it, though. I think states should be free to adopt similar laws as they see fit, and not have the feds go into this sort of thing that is typically and historically the province of the individual states.

Quote

do you have any insight as to the real reason there is so much resistance to this at the national level?

Yep. In the 1970's, the defense bar was the powerful bar. Plaintiffs lawyers were not in power. Large class actions and other things like that were not the norm. Watch Dirty Harry and you know that Scorpio would have filed a civil rights lawsuit after Callahan tortured the girl's location out of him. Why kidnap a bus and ask for a ransom when you can sue and get more?

Nowadays, the plaintiffs bar is the power. It is the Plaintiffs bar that would resist any limitations or liability. Back in the early 70's, the bar wasn't strong enough to put up a big fight. It is strong enough now. The money is huge.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[georgerussia 0]

Quote

As for a 250k limit on pain and suffering...
How much money would compensate you for never being able to skydive again, if caused by someone's malpractice?

Well, in most countries with government-managed healthcare you will not get ANY money for "pain and suffering" at all. And it will be useless to sue the doctor, because the government-paid doctors are poor. Sure the doctor might lose the license, but you won't get any money out of it. Not to mention the system protects doctors in such a case - after all, the doctors are just humans like every of us, and they do make mistakes; if the system revokes the doctor's license after the first mistake, there would be no doctors, as their salaries are usually not attractive to average person.

It is impossible to have high-quality and affordable health care available for everyone. No country has succeed in it. This cheap $5k surgery made in India is not affordable by vast majority of the India population either.

* Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

Quote

As for a 250k limit on pain and suffering...
How much money would compensate you for never being able to skydive again, if caused by someone's malpractice?

Well, in most countries with government-managed healthcare you will not get ANY money for "pain and suffering" at all.

We're not other countries, so that's not an answer.

[georgerussia 0]

Quote

We're not other countries, so that's not an answer.

That's the answer for the people who want government-managed healthcare.

* Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

[airdvr 210]

Quote

[So you're upset because you haven't gotten terribly sick or injured?

Rubbish. You need to read more carefully before jumping to absurd conclusions.

Quote

What other conclusion should we reach? You've paid in more than you've received. Why is that a problem? Tell us about the other things you purchase where the seller makes no profit.

Quote

John, it's called capitalism...a concept you despise unless it works in your favor. Did someone make a profit when you bought your last rig? Imagine the gov't controlling rig manufacturing. We'd still be jumping PC's with shot and a halfs.

Apparently you totally misunderstand my opinions, probably quite deliberately.

The US is not the world's only capitalist nation by a long long way, but it is the only developed nation with no national health care policy. Capitalism has nothing whatever to do with it.

Quote

Quote

You really believe that? Why do you think drug companies do research? Why do most hospitals have boards? I can assure they're not interested in breaking even. Take away the profit motive and R&D will come to a screeching halt. And no, I didn't deliberately misunderstand your opinions. I see them for exactly what they are.

I'm always amazed at the mentality of some of my fellow jumpers today. Soon you'll want bounce-proof gear.

It's called "RISK MANAGEMENT" and I'm very much in favor of it. So much so,that I think that it should be available to ALL Americans regardless of income or employment. And the ONLY way that can happen is if the government makes it happen.

[airdvr 210]

The realities of gov't funded healthcare.

http://freemarketcure.com/twowomen.php

http://freemarketcure.com/brainsurgery.php

http://freemarketcure.com/thelemon.php

http://www.onthefencefilms.com/video/deadmeat/deadmeat.html

Please don't dent the planet.

Destinations by Roxanne

[kallend 2,150]

Quote

Quote

Who are these uninsured folks? I can assure you they all have access to insurance, could afford it if they so choose, and instead choose not to.

So you have polled them all and know this for a fact?

Quote

They must be waiting for the gov't to do something about it. Climb down out of the tower and mingle with the commoners.

Quote

Clueless and unaware of it!

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[airdvr 210]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Who are these uninsured folks? I can assure you they all have access to insurance, could afford it if they so choose, and instead choose not to.

So you have polled them all and know this for a fact?

Quote

In as much as you know the opposite to be true

Quote

They must be waiting for the gov't to do something about it. Climb down out of the tower and mingle with the commoners.

Quote

Clueless and unaware of it!

It's all in your point of view...didn't you know that?

Quote

Please don't dent the planet.

Destinations by Roxanne

[kallend 2,150]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Who are these uninsured folks? I can assure you they all have access to insurance, could afford it if they so choose, and instead choose not to.

So you have polled them all and know this for a fact?

Quote

In as much as you know the opposite to be true

But I have made no such claim. YOU claimed to know what ALL of them can afford.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[Squeak 17]

Quote

Quote

It is impossible to have high-quality and affordable health care available for everyone. No country has succeed in it. .

Bullshit, we herec in OZ have very affordable healthcare, and of a high quality.
If you are after non essential surgery you will need to go on a waiting list. But you will ALWAYS be looked afetr for any sort of imdeadiate care requirements where ever possible.

You are not now, nor will you ever be, good enough to not die in this sport (Sparky)
My Life ROCKS!
How's yours doing?

• Quote

[georgerussia 0]

Quote

Bullshit, we herec in OZ have very affordable healthcare, and of a high quality.

So if I fell from chair, and want to get an MRI - right now - I can get it in OZ right now, correct?
And what do you mean by "affordable"? Is it free?

* Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *