Medical Malpractice News

Baucus Bill Seeks To Streamline Medical Malpractice Claims

Senator Introduces Bill To Help Make Health Care More Affordable

(WASHINGTON, D.C.) –In an effort to boost access to quality, affordable health care, Montana Senator Max Baucus today introduced legislation aimed at improving patient safety and streamlining the medical malpractice system.

Baucus teamed up with Wyoming Sen. Mike Enzi to introduce the Fair and Reliable Medical Justice Act, the culmination of years of work together with attorneys and health care providers.

The bill would provide grants to states which voluntarily implement one of three pilot programs that take a new approach to medical malpractice claims. The goal: improving patient safety, ensuring victims of medical malpractice get the compensation they deserve, and reducing health care costs for Montanans and Americans.

“It’s clear we need to take a new approach to medical malpractice claims,” Baucus said. “This is another way we can help curb rising health care costs while ensuring patients get the timely compensation they need and deserve.”

Baucus said typically reform proposals have focused on capping damages – or compensation – for patients. Baucus doesn’t support a bill in Congress that would cap compensation for medical malpractice victims at $250,000 because he says it’s “misguided” and doesn’t address the true problems with the system. Baucus’ approach would help settle complaints before litigation, instead of after, while ensuring just compensation for patients.

“Our current medical justice system does not provide prompt or fair compensation to injured patients,” said Enzi, Chairman of the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee. “It’s racked by inconsistencies and delays, and the majority of patients who sue recover little, if anything.”

The Fair and Reliable Medical Justice Act would establish state-based demonstration programs to help states test alternative systems of health care-related dispute resolution, through three different means:  early disclosure and compensation; administrative determination of compensation; and special health care courts. The bill does not preclude access to traditional tort litigation system as part of the dispute resolution process.

The bill will provide $500,000 in seed money to help each state develop an application for the grant the program.

-attached is a summary of the legislation-

SUMMARY: The Fair and Reliable Medical Justice Act

The Fair and Reliable Medical Justice Act would establish state-based demonstration programs to help states test alternative systems of health care-related dispute resolution under three different models:  early disclosure and compensation; administrative determination of compensation; and special health care courts.  Under the bill, states may develop other plans for resolving health care related disputes as well.

1) EARLY DISCLOSURE

The early disclosure and compensation model encourages health care providers to disclose medical errors that result in harm to patients and to offer just compensation for patients’ injuries.  Under this model, disclosures and offers of compensation do not constitute admissions of liability by providers as is the current system.  It assures patients of compensation for their net economic loss, non-economic losses, and attorney’s fees, in a timely manner.  It also maintains patients’ access to the traditional legal system in the event that claims cannot be resolved by the early disclosure process.  This model does not affect patients’ rights to bring court cases that result from criminal or intentional harm or fraud.

2) ADMINISTRATIVE DETERMINATION

The administrative determination of compensation model is similar to state worker’s compensation plans. A state would create an administrative board that would bring together patient advocates, providers, and attorneys to establish classes of avoidable injuries and determine compensation rates for each. Patients would be assured of compensation for their net economic loss, non-economic losses, and attorney’s fees. 

3) HEALTH CARE COURTS

The special health court model ensures that cases are adjudicated by judges with special health care expertise, assisted by independent expert witnesses.  Judges who sit on the special health care court would be subject to all the same criteria as any other state judge and would sit on the health care court voluntarily.  Under this model, states would have to provide an appeals process for reviewing decisions of the special health court.

Note: A 2002 Institute of Medicine report entitled “Fostering Rapid Advances in Health Care:  Learning from System Demonstrations,” which suggested state-based demonstrations in the area of medical liability reform, helped shape the Fair and Reliable Medical Justice Act.

Please contact us if anyone you know has suffered from debilitating injuries due to medical malpractice in DC.

	Did You Know?
	Drug-switching practices happen and are very dangerous Another public-spirited drug giant, Merck, was forced to pay a settlement of $1.9 million to 17 states in 1995 for drug-switching practices involving its Medco subsidiary. Medco pharmacists, who had given excessively favorable treatment to Merck products, were thereafter required to reveal their Merck connection to their customers.