Patients deserve information
Our editorial today supports the proposal by the N.C. Medical Board to post more information about physicians and physician assistants, including notations about malpractice judgments and settlements.
The North Carolina Medical Society, a private professional organization, raises some valid objections. Sometimes settlements are reached in malpractice cases not because the claim has merit but because it's less costly than going to court.
And going to court is risky. Skilled lawyers have won huge judgments or settlements in questionable cases.
But the Medical Society counterproposal seems clumsy. Get two practicing medical specialists to examine the case in contention and then post the malpractice information only if they conclude the patient received substandard care.
I'm not sure how that would work. How would these individuals be chosen? How much time would they have to investigate? Who would pay them?
No, better to post the information. The physician would be allowed to add his own explanation. If the Medical Society wants to post additional information on its own Web site, it would be free to do so.
Lawyers back the Medical Board proposal. But I think the State Bar should have to post on its Web site information about attorneys filing medical malpractice suits that get thrown out of court for lack of merit.
Comments (5)
To report abuse of the comment feature on this site, please use the feedback form at the bottom of any page.
Doug,
If I want to get my car worked on, I can check with the BBB and see if the business has had any complaints. But if I need open heart surgery, I can't check up on the surgeon who is going to cut me open.
Hmmm.
I think I will have to go with the N.C. Medical Board on this one. I think I am smart enough to interpret the information pertaining to any malpractice complaints/settlements/suits.
MD
Posted on June 3, 2008 8:25 AM
Where does it end though, guys? Can a doctor on duty refuse to see high risk people or check and see if the sick / injured/ high risk- for-bad -outcome person he's attending has ever sued anybody before, and if so, refuse to treat them?
If you use getting sued as a quality criteria, docs will cherry pick who they treat where possible, avoid high risk people/ tough cases and then good luck.
Posted on June 3, 2008 8:56 AM
You both express legitimate views. For all I know, physicians do share info about patients who have filed malpractice suits and avoid them.
Posted on June 3, 2008 12:52 PM
May happen on a small scale, Doug, like in a Dr's lounges etc, but not on any kind of disseminated or organized basis.
Posted on June 3, 2008 1:38 PM
A tough call, but I'm with the editorial: more information is always better than less, and there's nothing so distinctive about a doctor/patient relationship that should exempt it from normal market logic. (For that reason, I'd also support a doctor's right to refuse service.)
On the down side, however, such a program would almost certainly increase the pressure for defensive medicine, thus increasing health care costs. Ideal scenario: tort reform with a higher bar for malpractice suits and reduction of punitive damages, plus a bigger professional penalty for docs who seriously screw up.
Posted on June 4, 2008 2:08 AM