NationStates Jolt Archive

I think they finally found a definite way.

http://www.cnn.com/2004/LAW/11/15/medical.malpractice.ap/index.html

"TALLAHASSEE, Florida (AP) -- A judge on Monday blocked a just-approved state constitutional amendment that would yank the license of doctors who commit three acts of medical malpractice, saying some specifics need to be spelled out before it can take effect."


If determination of medical malpractice were in the hands of people who have any idea what they are talking about, I wouldn't have a problem with this, but it is not.

this just means more money spent on healthcare, and less doctors willing to go to Fl, and thus more money being spent by the patient. wonder if nurses will get a raise in pay ???. oh well chalk another one up for my home state ;)

How would this deter doctors? I would think it encourages them by not threatening to have their licences removed by malpractice suits which more often than not are baseless.

have to wait and see what constitues malpractice then. more than likely it will be more in favor of the patient than the doctor, my personal doctor for the past 8 years closed shop because of the rising costs from malpractice insurance ect, (family doctor too), and is working for hope hospice which pays just as well and they cover the mal practice. just one example of what many doctors are doing.

How would this deter doctors? I would think it encourages them by not threatening to have their licences removed by malpractice suits which more often than not are baseless.

If the suit is baseless then they will not be found guilty as having committed an act of malpractice and it won't count toward the three.

How would this deter doctors? I would think it encourages them by not threatening to have their licences removed by malpractice suits which more often than not are baseless.

The law, unless it is completely struck down, will deter doctors quite nicely.

If the suit is baseless then they will not be found guilty as having committed an act of malpractice and it won't count toward the three.

Not necessarily true. Baseless suits make it through more frequently than you'd like to think. All you need is a doctor you can paint as the rich, white evil and a patient who looks poor and defenseless. Add in a jury with no knowledge whatsoever of medicine and you've got a guilty verdict regardless of actual guilt.

have to wait and see what constitues malpractice then. more than likely it will be more in favor of the patient than the doctor, my personal doctor for the past 8 years closed shop because of the rising costs from malpractice insurance ect, (family doctor too), and is working for hope hospice which pays just as well and they cover the mal practice. just one example of what many doctors are doing.

And since even a hospice or hospital can only cover so much, the rising costs of malpractice insurance are pushing many doctors out of areas altogether.

Not necessarily true. Baseless suits make it through more frequently than you'd like to think. All you need is a doctor you can paint as the rich, white evil and a patient who looks poor and defenseless. Add in a jury with no knowledge whatsoever of medicine and you've got a guilty verdict regardless of actual guilt.
Exactly.

They don't even have to be found guilty to get a strike against them, actually. I don't remember the specifics, but it had something to do with the doctor or hospital making a deal with the patient after a certain point in the process. That would also count against them. It is a stupid law.

Florida is doing very well at driving docs out of the state, at the moment. At least #3 passed. *Sigh* Unfortunately, #7 & 8 did too. One is the one that this thread discusses, the other has to do with forcing doctors to make records of certain meetings they have public. A bunch of doctors will get together after one of their own has committed malpractice (or a case is suspicious, ect.) and discuss how it could have been done better, and what they will do about it. They can and have decredentialed fellow doctors before after deciding to do so in these private meetings. Now that they will be forced to make everything that is said public, they won't meet anymore,

By the way, malpractice in Florida is KILLER. My mom, an OBGYN who practices in PCB, would have to set aside 60 cents for every dollar she makes to pay for malpractice insurance, and she has never even been sued. None of the OBs in town can afford malpractice insurance. They take a risk with every patient.

Exactly.

They don't even have to be found guilty to get a strike against them, actually. I don't remember the specifics, but it had something to do with the doctor or hospital making a deal with the patient after a certain point in the process. That would also count against them. It is a stupid law.

And many of those deals are made when the doctor has done nothing wrong, but knows that a jury may not understand the medicine of the case, or has been burned once and doesn't want to again.