Tort reform is not our job

Warning: long discussion about medical malpractice initiative I330 ahead.

Short form - Vote NO on I330

Most of you have probably been bombarded by media on the two "tort reform" initiatives - I330 and I336. I330 is the more disturbing of the two. I330 limits noneconomic loss recovery (i.e., pain and suffering) for victims of bungled medical procedures. This is advertised as the "doctor's bill" - with the idea that a limit on awards given out by juries in medical malpractice cases will get the out of control insurance premiums for doctors back under control. Insurance premiums for docs are crazy out of hand - docs, especially those in sensitive fields where people are more likely to sue, like obstetricians, are leaving their practices in droves because of the crushing premiums for medical malpractice insurance. Fixing this problem is necessary to ensure quality health care, particularly for those in rural areas - HOWEVER, it is totally unclear, at least to us, that limiting awards from lawsuits will reduce insurance premiums. Right now doctors who have zero malpractice claims against them have premiums that are just as high as doctors that a jury found had committed malpractice. This is crazy - people with lots of car accidents pay more for car insurance, hello! - we think insurance regulation is in order, not a roundabout approach by limiting what a jury can award to someone who is hurt.

Of course, personal injury lawyers are fighting hard against I330 - for attorneys that earn their living through contingency fees paid out of of jury awards, a limit on awards could drastically limit their income. (Full disclosure: I'm a lawyer, although not the personal injury variety. But this issue has gotten a lot of attention in the legal community.) The bigger concern, though, is that people who won't recover much money through economic awards (lost wages) will not recover much at all - and these are often the most vulnerable - the poor, stay-at-home moms, the elderly and children. Also, I330 would force many to sign away their right to a jury trial if they want to sue their doctor. A rule of thumb - binding arbitration is good for big guy, bad for the little guy.

It looks like the legislature is finally going to do its job - a recent House Bill was introduced that would be something of a middle ground. This is after some practice - related bills were discussed in earlier years and Olympia caved on each of them. We think the legislature should deal with this problem - not us. It's complicated and confusing and it should be worked out by experts.

Vote no on I330. Make the politicians fix the insurance industry. That's what we elect them for.

-- k

Tags: uptown, seattle, election, i330, malpractice