There’s been a lot of public commentary about the need for malpractice reform, especially because the cost of malpractice drastically adds to the overall cost of providing health care. KevinMD.com medical webblog comments that more health care providers could be convinced to support a single-payor system like Canada or a a hybrid public- private system like European countries, if they could be protected from the lengthy, traumatizing and expensive litigation system we have in the U.S. Here’s what other countries do:
- In Canada, judges (not juries) try malpractice cases, which keeps the awards lower.
- Great Britain limits the successful plaintiff’s attorney’s to twice his customary fee, rather than 30%-50% of the award.
- German judges appoint their own neutral expert witnesses, thus avoiding the ‘dueling expert’ situation often found in US malpractice trials.
Considering the fact that 54 cents of every dollar goes toward administrative costs in our current system, these ideas sound both reasonable and financially prudent. And, they could be strong selling points in order to get more health care providers to support health care reform.
Foot and Ankle Care Products from Myfootshop.com 
A 2008 Common Good report funded by the Robert Woods Johnson Foundation put forth the idea of setting up “health courts” as an alternative approach to medical injury litigation. In short, the court would be staffed with judges specifically trained with the medical information needed to be competent trying medical malpractice cases.
I contacted some of the board members who worked on the initiative in an effort to determine if this would be a viable alternative for me. I found that the study went no further than the paper written. No pilot test court was established. I believe the proposal had great merit. Apparently the monied antagonists disagreed.
I did not pursue private litigation because I could not afford it. I also found no lawyers willing to work on a contingency basis or pro bono. I became disabled at age 50 because doctors did no more than shuffle me from one doctor and test to the next. The number of medical errors they made was astounding and are highlighted on my blog http://doctorblue.wordpress.com
Comment by doctorblue — July 16, 2009 @ 3:59 pm
I totally agree. It is difficult for the President to argue that health care is inefficient in one breath and then argue that tort reform is not necessary. The practice of defensive medicine costs an estimated $100 billion-plus each year, according to the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons. It is an absolutely necessary part of comprehensive health care reform. I’ve written an article about health care reform, including tort reform at http://www.brillsdiscontent.wordpress.com.
Comment by David Brill — July 25, 2009 @ 9:27 pm