By Beauty Damned

Guest Post

Nunya posted this in a thread yesterday, and I felt it was well deserving of it's own post. Bravo Nunya

Today, in the midst of a few pop-up windows that squeezed by my filter, I was so rudely interrupted by one that caught my eye. A picture of a stern faced bush looking down upon his minions and beside it a web form asking you to send the following message to your congressman:

"Dear Member of Congress

I am deeply concerned about the status of the United States healthcare system. Costs are escalating rapidly. At the same time, it’s getting more and more difficult for patients like me to get an appointment with a doctor near home.

I support President Bush’s approach to solving this problem—medical liability reform. The fact is, thousands of frivolous medical lawsuits are filed each year by individuals hoping to “hit the lottery” with a big court award. Even though fewer than 10% ever make trial, the costs of defending against these suits are high—and are ultimately passed down to patients. What’s worse, when physicians can no longer afford the rising cost of liability insurance, they simply retire, leave the area, or limit the treatment they offer—leaving patients in many areas without adequate access to medical care.

The great thing about liability reform is that there are no losers—except the trial lawyers. Patients with legitimate suits will be able to recover unlimited economic damages to cover future medical expenses, lost wages, etc. Non-economic damages, like “pain and suffering,” would be capped at $250,000.

This is a reasonable proposal that will have a positive impact on our healthcare system, and I encourage you, as my elected representative in Congress, to do everything in your power to get it passed. Thank you for your time."

Forget the glaringly obvious problems (see "corporate pandering") that exist. Let me bring it down by quoting this so called letter:

"I am deeply concerned about the status of the United States healthcare system. Costs are escalating rapidly. At the same time, it’s getting more and more difficult for patients like me to get an appointment with a doctor near home."

You cannot argue with most of the points here, however, I live in the suburbs of a mid sized southern area and my doctor is right around the corner from me, granted, I do not have an HMO - which if I did, of course I would have to go traveling because HMO's are now housed in what resemble "corporate malls" tucked away in business parks - they no longer resemble doctors offices and you are no longer treated like a patient. Also, you will most likely be seen by a Nurse Practitioner or a Physicians Assistant anyway.

"I support President Bush’s approach to solving this problem—medical liability reform. The fact is, thousands of frivolous medical lawsuits are filed each year by individuals hoping to “hit the lottery” with a big court award"

It is amazing how even some of the most hard core republicans over the years had alternate methods of solving the healthcare cost problems in this country, just as the dems did, but along comes YeeHaw Cowboy Bush and his God Given answer to solving a nearly unsolvable problem is "liability reform." And these "frivolous" claims? Where are they? Can we see some of them? Is it frivolous if someone has a scalpel left inside of them? Is it frivolous if a nurse gives the wrong medication to a patient that has an allergic reaction and dies? And I LOVE the "big court reward" - more on that later.

"Even though fewer than 10% ever make trial, the costs of defending against these suits are high—and are ultimately passed down to patients."

Ever wonder why the other 90% of these cases never went to trial? Perhaps they were not so "frivolous" after all. The insurance companies also have super-lawyers on their payrolls - and when those super lawyers advise "hey, we will never win this case in trial, lets settle" I think they know what they are talking about. Granted, there are some cases that are "frivolous" if not fraudulent, but that goes with the territory when you have a private insurance industry. And the costs no matter what are ALWAYS handed down to the patients, but most of those costs are for the offset of the care for very sick patients (cancer treatment, transplant, etc.) not because of lawsuits. Health care insurance is very lucrative industry. It is a money maker.

"What’s worse, when physicians can no longer afford the rising cost of liability insurance, they simply retire, leave the area, or limit the treatment they offer—leaving patients in many areas without adequate access to medical care."

1) In case they haven't noticed, most doctors no longer have private practices. They are either working for a hospital healthcare system, an HMO, or become specialists working under a system - all which pay for the liability insurance for them. They are not leaving, retiring, etc. There is simply a big squeeze for health care workers in all areas. And as well, the number of doctors (not even good ones) coming out of medical school are dwindling because a) the school is too long b) too difficult. Also, people see the insane hours residents have to work and decide against becoming doctors. The pay rate doesn't amount to a whole lot when you are working 90 hour weeks. They also realize the wealth and prestige is a myth. Folks years ago didn't become doctors for money first, they became doctors for the love of helping people. Folks just don't generally feel that way anymore. Everything is "how much can I make?" And adequate access - there are more hospitals available to folks then ever before.

"The great thing about liability reform is that there are no losers—except the trial lawyers. Patients with legitimate suits will be able to recover unlimited economic damages to cover future medical expenses, lost wages, etc. Non-economic damages, like “pain and suffering,” would be capped at $250,000."

This is the one that just kills me. You really have to be uneducated, living in a damn hole, super moron to buy into this. There are no losers involved. And patients with legit lawsuits will recover "unlimited economic damages" it is just the "non economic damages" that will be capped. Let me break this one down for you in case the idiot who came up with this letter didn't do it. An economic damage is something that is probably defined as:
1) Future Medical expenses
2) Lost wages

Non-economic is:

1) Pain and suffering

So, according to this "plan" of the pig Bush, let’s say a child who needs to go into a hospital for a high fever is given a medicine that clearly is stated on a medical chart that he or she is allergic to. The doctor, who has just got over a 32 hour shift, who is obviously tired and over worked (because the hospital will not hire more doctors) doesn't realize his error. The child dies from this medication - now there are no future medical expenses other than funeral arrangements and no lost wages, or as far as can been seen, no other "economical" expenses because after all, a child does not contribute economically to a family. So, this family, who brought their child in leaves without their child can only get $250,000 maximum for their pain and suffering (where as that is about the salary of new staff doctor fresh out of residency)? This is fair how?

"This is a reasonable proposal that will have a positive impact on our healthcare system, and I encourage you, as my elected representative in Congress, to do everything in your power to get it passed. Thank you for your time."

Let's get it straight. It will have a positive impact on the bottom line of the health care insurers. And do you think they will actually lower the costs? I worked for a health care insurance company - and when they had a huge profit one year, they could have given rebates to customers, even thought about it. Instead, they chose to give the CEO and the directors big bonuses and than invest the rest in the stock market and mutual funds.

In closing, our health care system is in a crisis. Why? Because some people think it is a system that should generate revenue. Some people think you should be able to get rich off of it. So naturally, it is treated like a business, when the moral thing to do is treat it like a service. Thus, it should be a funded service offered by the government to every citizen of this country. We have highway infrastructure that is maintained and upgraded better than we as humans are. After all, the bosses need you to get to work somehow. Imagine what a healthy workforce would do. Imagine what not having to pay unrealistic costs for insurance would do for the economy? Imagine what a government controlled healthcare workforce would do for nurses and doctors being forced to work 80 - 120 hour weeks. A well rested and well staffed workforce means a workforce that tends to make fewer mistakes.

And finally, let us be totally honest about where the REAL costs to the insurance companies are pounded from - drugs. The pharmaceuticals industry ADVERTISES prescription drugs on TV. And they don’t do it for your health and well being - they do it because they make billions off of this. And doctors are quick to prescribe whatever patients want. Why? Because the pharmaceuticals companies give kickbacks to doctors who tend to prescribe these products. And this is all legal.

Is it an easily solvable problem, healthcare reform? No. But I can guarantee you that "liability reform" is the step in the wrong direction.

Posted by nunya at August 16, 2004 10:32 PM

Posted by Maria at August 17, 2004 03:58 PM | TrackBack