Smith suffered from ulcerative colitis. He had surgery at St. That went fine. What happened after was the problem. Alleging wrongful death and medical malpractice, court records state: " Smith's last days were a nightmare. His death was preordained by the misconduct of doctors and nurses.
None of this had to be. The lawsuit names two doctors, the St. Rose nursing staff, St. In addition to the failure to give anticoagulants, the lawsuit says Smith did not receive the necessary training on how to care for and manage his condition. What he was given — the products he was given — were completely improper.
Sometimes the organization a provider works for or with—such as a hospital or physician group—directly pays the costs of malpractice claims. This is often referred to as self-insurance.
State and Local Governments Pay for a Substantial Amount of Health Care The state and local governments in California spend tens of billions of dollars annually on health care services.
The major types of public health care spending are: Health Coverage for Government Employees and Retirees. The state, public universities, cities, counties, school districts, and other local governments in California pay for a significant portion of health costs for their employees and their families and for some retirees. In California, the federal-state Medicaid program is known as Medi-Cal.
State-Operated Mental Hospitals and Prisons. The state operates facilities, such as mental hospitals and prisons, that provide direct health care services. Local Government Health Programs. Local governments—primarily counties—pay for many health care services, mainly for low-income individuals. Some counties operate hospitals and clinics that provide health care services. Fiscal Effects This measure would likely have a wide variety of fiscal effects on state and local governments—many of which are subject to substantial uncertainty.
Effects of Raising or Removing Cap on Noneconomic Damages in Medical Malpractice Cases Raising or removing the cap on noneconomic damages would likely increase overall health care spending in California both governmental and nongovernmental by: 1 increasing direct medical malpractice costs and 2 changing the amount and types of health care provided.
Raising the cap on noneconomic damages would likely affect direct medical malpractice costs in the following ways: Higher Damages. Raising or removing the cap on noneconomic damages would increase the amount of damages in many malpractice claims.
Change in the Number of Malpractice Claims. Raising or removing the cap on noneconomic damages would also change the total number of malpractice claims, although it is unclear whether the total number of claims would increase or decrease. For example, raising or removing the cap would likely encourage health care providers to practice medicine in a way that decreases the number of medical malpractice claims.
We discuss this change in behavior further below. On the other hand, raising or removing the cap on noneconomic damages would increase the amount of damages—thereby increasing the amount that could potentially go to an attorney representing an injured party on a contingency-fee basis. This, in turn, would make it more likely that an attorney would be willing to represent an injured party, thereby increasing the number of claims.
For example: Health care providers may order additional tests and procedures to avoid facing a medical malpractice lawsuit. This could simply increase the total cost of health care services, to the extent that the additional tests and procedures do not result in future offsetting savings.
Health care providers may order fewer high-risk tests and procedures, to avoid complications that may result in a medical malpractice lawsuit. This could result in health care savings, more likely in the short term. Research on the Fiscal Impact of Other Provisions Is Inconclusive In contrast to the existing literature on the effect of caps on noneconomic damages, available research on the other provisions this measure would enact does not provide conclusive evidence on the direction or magnitude of effect on state and local government spending.
Other Fiscal Effects This measure could have some other additional, although likely relatively minor, fiscal effects. Recovery of Malpractice Awards. As noted previously, when Medi-Cal has paid for health benefits provided to a beneficiary injured by medical malpractice, it may recover a portion of medical malpractice damages awarded to the beneficiary to reimburse the state costs of these benefits.
Increasing the number of medical malpractice awards would potentially increase the amount that could be recovered by the state through Medi-Cal. Additionally, this measure would no longer allow evidence of outside sources of payment to be considered in medical malpractice cases and would allow these sources to recover their costs. This would broaden the recovery of malpractice awards to include entities outside of Medi-Cal, including insurers that provide health care coverage for state and local government employees.
Increased recoveries by such insurers could potentially partially offset increased costs due to higher damage awards, which, as discussed previously, we assume would be passed on to the governments purchasing the coverage.
The amount of such an offset is uncertain, but likely relatively minor. State Trial Court Costs. This measure could potentially increase the number of medical malpractice cases and thereby increase costs for state trial courts. It could also potentially increase the length of cases, which would increase costs for state trial courts as well.
The best source of information is the state medical licensing board, although you will need to check each state where the healthcare provider had practiced. The background search of a healthcare provider's medical history takes time, so don't be discouraged if you don't get your answers immediately. In some cases, you may need to speak with someone on the phone; in others, you may find what you need online. To do a background medical search:.
Remember that there may be more than one healthcare provider with the same name. Cross-reference whatever information you have to ensure you don't make a mistake. It is important that you contact every state medical licensing board under which the healthcare provider has practiced, not just your own.
Malpractice suits and disciplinary actions do not always get transferred from one licensing board to the next. The sad truth is that a healthcare provider can amass a malpractice track record in one state, get licensed in a new state, and start again with a clean slate.
As such, you need to do your homework to ensure you get the fullest body of evidence possible. Even when malpractice or disciplinary information can be found, it may require an explanation of terminology or circumstances.
Judging a healthcare provider simply on that healthcare provider's malpractice track record may not provide the whole story.
For example, some of rankings websites may indicate that a surgeon is "successful. A record that shows a higher failure rate doesn't always mean that a healthcare provider is "less successful. The same applies to the uncovering of a malpractice suit. While it can steer you well away from a less-than-reputable healthcare provider, it can also lead to wrong assumptions. As much as a malpractice suit may be a red flag, it doesn't necessarily mean that it was justified. It is not unusual for a suit to be filed for a death or injury beyond a healthcare provider's control.
Be fair and speak with the healthcare provider rather than making a wrong assumption. The main thing is to be objective and goal-oriented. The goal is not to uncover dirt; it is to find you the best healthcare provider, surgeon, or specialist for your needs and condition.
To this end, don't hesitate to ask a healthcare provider about a malpractice suit or other action you may find. While you may not get the answers you need, you at least have the opportunity to make an informed judgment based on all of the facts you've received. Upon completing a background search, don't be disappointed if you end up with scant information.
It may mean that the healthcare provider has a clean record, or it may be that an infraction has been legally removed. For example, if a lawsuit has been settled out of court, it may be removed since the claim will have been withdrawn. It doesn't mean that the healthcare provider was in the wrong sometimes it's cheaper to settle than to incur expensive legal fees and doesn't mean that the healthcare provider is right.
If you don't have any information about a healthcare provider, go the direct route and simply ask if he or she has ever been hit with a malpractice suit, civil action, or disciplinary action. It's your right to know. Be respectful and simply let your instinct tell you what makes sense and what doesn't. Medical malpractice is a legal action taken against a medical professional who has caused an injury or death due to negligence or a deviation from standard medical practices.
0コメント