Health Care Reform (My Ass, Still)

JW,

I'm watching a commercial right now for Education Connection, the online university database that matches deadbeats to their future diploma mill and advertises that fact with a po-faced white chick singing atonally. You asked me to talk a little more about tort reform. Here is my argument. The American medical malpractice system is a lottery for the slothful, the ill-bred, and the socially unacceptable. It's bankrupting the country, and it's doing so for the sake of people who can't read. And their lawyers.

Ingrained in the liberal imagination, though, is a different picture. Tiny Tim at the Christmas table, sobbing in his gravy because the doctors amputated the wrong leg. What liberals fail to imagine is the trailer-to-penthouse dream that has the Cletuses of the world praying for bad treatment. (It's either that or go back to college.) A lawyer friend of mine reports being asked to represent "victims" of such abuses as . . .

1) a medical receptionist losing files

2) a doctor refusing to prescribe antibiotics for a cold

3) a wait of more than three hours for a scheduled office visit

. . . and while these anecdotes prove nothing except that white people need to get their act together just as much as black people do, there's plenty of real evidence that the current system is broken.

Consider the following. While Tom Baker--the fellow you mentioned in your previous post--has lots of numbers at his disposal, he neglects to mention that medical liability premiums have gone up an estimated 2,000% since 1975. (My source? The same actuarial firm from which Baker got his numbers!) Furthermore,

"At 12 percent per year, the growth rate in medical malpractice premiums since 1975 is four times the rate of inflation and twice the rate of inflation in the cost of health care. Million-dollar verdicts are now the norm in jury trials: 52% of all awards exceed $1 million, while the average award now weighs in at $4.7 million."

Tackling health care "reform" without addressing the costs that doctors' insurance premiums add to the system is a fool's errand--it's nakedly, pitifully political--and I'm ashamed of the country for even thinking about it.

Convinced?

-GM

GM,

I am convinced. And this issue reminds me of an all-too-similar traveshamockery in this country--the reference check.

According to a Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM) survey, 63 percent of employers have refused to provide references for former employees because they feared a lawsuit. See, if Manager A believes that a former employee is dishonest or lazy, he may be able to help Manager B from another company by conveying that belief in the form of a bad reference. These descriptions are so inherently subjective -- and potentially damanging -- that Manager A could be held liable in a civil suit.

To promote the public interest of not hiring horrible people, 32 states have given employers qualitative privilege, which is essentially leeway that helps them avoid civil litigation. This theoretically allows employers to give an opinion about a former employee as long as it's not given with malice or recklessness... and that's where the subjectivity and inconsistency of the courts come in:

1. Berg v. Consolidated Freightways, Inc.: William Berg Jr. sued and was awarded $40,600 from his former employer because it forced him to resign amidst an investigation of theft. Let's go over that again. The company believed the guy was stealing, so it told him to quit or be fired, and the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania decided that action was enough to impair his reputation--and pay for it. This is known as "defamation by conduct."

2. Tacket v. Delco Remy Division of General Motors Corporation: Thomas Tacket sued GM after a coworker painted "Tacket Tacket What a Racket" on the wall at its plant in Anderson, Indiana. He was originally awarded $100,000 for psychological damages because the company failed to remove the defamatory statement. This is known as "defamation by neglect." Fortunately a higher court overturned it on appeal.

3. Lewis v. Equitable Life Assurance Co. Soc. of U.S.: Four employees were fired for "gross insubordination." Sounds pretty bad, right. Well, the Minnesota Supreme Court determined they were victims of "compelled self publication," meaning that they had to reveal the reason for their termination to potential employers. Then the court determined that the whole "gross insubordination" thing was unsubstantiated and made the company pay up! Nobody from HR or anywhere else ever said a word!!!

Now, here's where the real parellel is between medical malpractice suits and reference defamation suits: the fear far outweighs the actual threat. Yet the fear is legitimate--especially for doctors--because one bad ruling could cripple the whole business. Unfortunately, there is no insurance to cover companies for reference defamation. This is the world we live in.

-JW