|
|
 |
 |
 |
|
|
|||
|
||||
|
||||
Re: Kerry/Edwards Tort ReformFrom: Lynn D. Montgomery, M.D. (apgar10@montanadsl.net)Sat Jul 31 12:48:52 2004
I also did not want to discuss American politics, but I was surprised by the Kerry/Edwards proposals regarding medical malpractice tort reform, namely: [Lynn D. Montgomery, M.D.] I think you are correct - the means to an end is what is important to us. A requirement that medical malpractice claims first go before a qualified medical specialist to determine whether a reasonable grievance exists. [Lynn D. Montgomery, M.D.] Certainly depends upon the definition of "qualified medical specialist" because we all know that you can buy what ever opinion you want. A requirement that states ensure the availability of non-binding mediation in all malpractice claims before cases proceed to trial. [Lynn D. Montgomery, M.D.] In Montana, we have a Medico-legal Panel composed on three attorneys and three physicians. Before a case can proceed onto suit, it has to be presented to the Panel. The plaintiff and their attorney, along with the defendant and their attorney present their case. Members of the Panel are allowed to question both sides. Following deliberation, the Panel votes. Unfortunately, the decision of the Panel has no teeth - in other words, the case can proceed, regardless of the Panel vote. Further, the decision of the Panel is not admissible in court. Advocates of the Panel argue that it is still a reasonable endeavor because an attorney that gets a unanimous vote against, may decide to drop the suit. I would like to see the decision of the Panel be the word on whether or not a case progresses. Support for sanctions against plaintiffs and lawyers who bring frivolous medical malpractice claims, including a "three strikes and you're out" provision preventing lawyers who file three frivolous cases from bringing another suit for 10 years. [Lynn D. Montgomery, M.D.] Would certainly weed out several that I know. Opposing punitive damages -- unless intentional misconduct, gross negligence, or reckless indifference to life can be established. [Lynn D. Montgomery, M.D.] Very reasonable - after all I think we would all agree with this one. Eliminating special privileges that allow insurance companies to fix prices and collude in ways that increase medical malpractice premiums." [Lynn D. Montgomery, M.D.] Damn right Seem reasonable to me - maybe our discussion should center on these proposals? (My intent for my original post) Robert Modugno MD MBA FACOG Marietta, GA http://www.novaobgyn.yourmd.com (By the way, I think Dubya would have handled the Waco Wackos the same way Janet Reno did!)
|
|
Return to
|
Mail a New Message to the Forum: ob-gyn-l@obgyn.net Forum Administrator: geffrey.klein@obgyn.net Report Technical Problems: webmaster@obgyn.net Last Updated: Wed Jul 2 04:37:37 2008 |
The American Medical Association is no longer designating CME hours for AMA Category II CME credit. However, physicians themselves may self designate learning activities as Category II CME credit hours if they feel it is of sufficient educational merit and meets the formal definitions of continuing medical education. OBGYN.net believes these interaction in this forum meets these criteria. For further information see the AMA web site.