/congress/civjus/medmal/articles.cfm

What America’s Opinion Pages Are Saying About Medical Malpractice

Current as of April 16, 2003

"Is it any coincidence that the states least likely to discipline doctors are among those with insurance crises? … The problem is not the compensation paid to injured patients, but an epidemic of medical errors."
--New York Times Guest Editorial, Sidney M. Wolfe, Director,
Public Citizen Health Research Group,
 3/4/03
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/03/04/opinion/04WOLF.html

"But clear away the dubious studies, the exaggerated line charts, the hysterical press releases, and look at the numbers, and the statistical case for caps is flimsy."
--BusinessWeek, Lorraine Woellert, Legal Affairs, Commentary, 3/3/03
http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/03_09/b3822079.htm

" … what the current advocates desire is not real tort reform but to immunize powerful interests from the consequences of irresponsible civil behavior … But George Bush and his allies propose ill-advised tort reforms that would hurt innocent victims and are outrageously hypocritical."
--Wall Street Journal, Al Hunt’s Column, 3/6/03

"Medical malpractice reform is bad medicine…Yet despite this epidemic of [medical] errors, fewer than 2% of the victims of medical malpractice ever sue their doctors … verdicts of $1 million occur in only 4% of medical malpractice cases, and they are usually reduced to a median of $235,000 upon final judgment."
--BusinessInsurance.com, Joanne Wojcik, Senior Editor, Commentary, 2/24/03

"…beware of solutions that are worse than the problem … federal caps on the amounts juries can award would do a needless injustice."
--Raleigh News & Observer Editorial, 1/20/03

"…cap[ping] pain-and-suffering awards … is the wrong prescription. Missouri already caps pain-and-suffering awards, yet malpractice insurance rates here continue to rise sharply."
--St. Louis Post-Dispatch Editorial, 1/19/03

"…proponents of the cap are unable to demonstrate the degree (if any) to which the targeted type of jury awards are responsible for recent spikes in medical malpractice insurance rates or that capping the awards will reduce those rates here."
--Seattle Post-Intelligencer Editorial, 2/2/03
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/opinion/106750_malpracted.shtml

"Statistics don’t support the claim that insurance premiums have been bloated largely by an explosion of frivolous lawsuits and excessive jury verdicts."
--Fort Worth Star-Telegram Editorial, 3/23/03

"The most direct cause for increased medical malpractice costs can be traced to poor management decisions by the insurance companies. Their profits have fallen dramatically with lower interest rates, resulting in a lower return on investments by these companies."
--Los Angeles Times Guest Editorial
Jonathan Turley, Professor at George Washington University Law School, 1/6/03

"The demonstrating doctors have been playing a catchy but monotonous and thoroughly misleading tune about malpractice. For all the screaming about runaway juries and big malpractice awards, the evidence is not there."
--Newark Star Ledger Editorial, 2/18/03

"The lesson for West Virginia should be clear: insurance reform not tort reform is the real answer."
--Charleston (WV) Gazette Editorial, 1/17/03

"Jury award caps are easy to sell, but are no medical malpractice solution."
--Allentown Morning Call Editorial, 1/19/03

"In fact, nothing about California’s experience suggests that limiting jury awards will reduce malpractice premiums, or even slow their rate of increase."
--Palm Beach Post Editorial, Dan Moffett, 2/2/03

"BAD MEDICINE: Doctors’ malpractice lies at heart of insurance crisis"
--Houston Chronicle Editorial, 1/12/03

"President Bush's proposal to deal with the soaring medical malpractice insurance rates by capping damage awards is like treating a brain tumor by getting a haircut. It may make the situation look better, but it does precious little to solve the problem."
--Salt Lake Tribune Editorial, 1/21/03

"Bush’s damage caps do almost nothing to address the issue of frivolous cases … the caps will penalize the most severely injured patients with the strongest claims."
--Chicago Tribune Guest Editorial, Steven Lubet, Northwestern University School of Law, 1/22/03

"Among other things, ‘tort reform’ would allow insurers to make up for lost investment income by cheating plaintiffs who were harmed by medical errors."
--Atlanta Journal Constitution Editorial, 3/2/03

"As a registered nurse, I've seen my share of incompetent physicians. Every year, between 44,000 and 98,000 people die as a result of medical mistakes … Tort reform is not the answer."
Sun-Sentinel Guest Editorial, C.A. Fugate, Registered Nurse, 3/10/03

"It doesn't make sense to further harm people who have already been hurt in an effort to restrict the earnings of trial lawyers."
--Oakland Tribune Editorial, 2/10/03

"Consumer advocates have long known that the only way to stop periodic insurance crises … involves stricter rate regulation, public oversight and repeal of the industry's extraordinary exemption from antitrust laws."
--USA Today Guest Editorial, Joanne Doroshow, Exec. Director, Center for Justice & Democracy, 1/20/03
http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/editorials/2003-02-10-oppose_x.htm

"Medical Mistakes, Not Lawsuits, Are The Problem"
--Hartford Courant Guest Editorial, Tom Baker, University of Connecticut School of Law Director, Insurance Law Center, 1/26/03

"Value of Human Lives Shouldn’t Be Capped"
--Newsday, Marie Cocco’s Column, 2/25/03


"Crack down on the few lousy doctors, and this crisis might be cured"
--Newark Star Ledger, John McLaughlin’s Column, 2/9/03

"Supporters of a federal cap typically justify it by citing lower malpractice premiums in California. They don't mention that premiums in the state didn't really start to come down until voters imposed strict rate controls on insurance companies in 1988."
--Orlando Sentinel, 3/15/03

"THE WRONG REMEDY FOR THE MALPRACTICE SYSTEM."
--Roanoke Times & World News, 3/17/03

"Still, it's not just jury awards that are driving up premiums. One big reason they're going up is that the insurance carriers aren't making as much when they invest money set aside in reserve."
--Portland Maine Press Herald, 3/13/03

"With documented medical mistakes soaring, it is astonishing that federally proposed legislation would first target the victims of medical error, before addressing the errors themselves."
--Chicago Sun Times Guest Editorial, Kathleen Osberger, Licensed Clinical Social Worker

"…a relevant study conducted by the non-partisan and thoroughly competent staff of the Legislative Research Commission … showed that jury award caps would not decrease doctors’ malpractice insurance premiums but, in fact, could result in an increase in those premiums."
--Henderson Gleaner Guest Editorial, Kentucky State Sen. Daniel Mongiardo, MD

"Want to slow medical malpractice complaints? Crack down on bad doctors."
--Dallas Morning News Editorial, 2/15/03

"Quack Remedy to Cap Malpractice Awards"
--St. Petersburg Times, Martin Dyckman’s Column, 1/19/03

"[State insurance commissioners] might prod insurers to … impose higher rates on doctors guilty of malpractice, so that a small number of careless doctors don’t drive up the rates for their colleagues."
--New York Times Editorial, 1/17/03

"… there is persuasive evidence that the main reason for rising premiums nationwide isn't outrageous malpractice awards, but the investment losses of the insurance industry and the reluctance of doctors and state medical boards to take aggressive action against the few physicians who make serious or repeated mistakes.."
--Star News (Wilmington, North Carolina) Editorial, 4/10/03

"The $250,000 cap is a quick-fix that fails to address
the causes of high malpractice premiums."
--Miami Herald Editorial, 4/7/03

"[This] $250,000 ceiling on noneconomic damages … would disproportionately affect the most vulnerable of Florida's people: the elderly, the very young, full-time homemakers, the unemployed."
--St. Petersburg Times Editorial, 4/2/03

"The malpractice insurance problem won't be solved with a cap."
--Orlando Sentinel Editorial, 4/13/03

"It is a misguided approach that penalizes the victims, does nothing to reduce medical errors and can't ensure lower rates either."
--Oregonian Editorial, 4/1/03

"The public should be wary of this new attempt to curtail consumer protection."
--Seattle Post-Intelligencer, Helen Thomas’ column, 1/12/03

"Doctors and hospitals are paying too much for their malpractice insurance coverage. But they are off the mark in blaming lawsuit-happy patients and their lawyers... Over the past decade, the number of malpractice lawsuits has dropped."
--Harrisburg Patriot News Guest Editorial, Charles Inlander, President, People’s Medical Society, 4/30/03