Skip to main content

President's State of the Union Address Targets Frivolous Lawsuits: Was I Dreaming?

Image
By
We watched the president’s State of the Union address recently with the kids, to try and inculcate them with civic interest and responsibility. He is an inspiring and skilled speaker whose words seem to transcend partisanship and divisiveness. Nothing like an electoral ‘shellacking’ to push a politician into a Kumbaya mode. I thought the speech was long on ideals but sidestepped the pain and sacrifice it would take to reach the objectives the president outlined. I was waiting to hear the president’s plans regarding Medicare and Social Security, and I’m still waiting. The president took such a high road, that it was in the stratosphere, beyond real life.


Here’s what he said:

 ...by the end of the decade, America will once again have the highest proportion of college graduates in the world.

Here’s what he didn’t say:

...to save Social Security we are cutting benefits and raising the age when seniors can collect.

I’m not a journalist or a speechwriter, but my understanding is that the reverse pyramid system is used, meaning you start off with the important stuff and proceed toward the trivial. This is why The New York Times piece on the speech did not open with a comment on the president’s tie.

The following three subjects were included in the President’s speech. Place them in the order of importance.

The War in Afghanistan

The Peace in Iraq

Medical Malpractice Reform

Has the president experienced a Damascus Road conversion on the medical malpractice situation.? Not only did he acknowledge that frivolous lawsuits are real and are not simply physicians’ phantasmagoria, but he addressed the issue before mentioning Iraq and Afghanistan. Am I reading too much into this? Here’s what he said.

Still, I'm willing to look at other ideas to bring down costs, including one that Republicans suggested last year: medical malpractice reform to rein in frivolous lawsuits.

Does the president really get it, or is he the wily political pragmatist who now views life through the prism of 2012? I suspect the latter because if medical malpractice reform were truly important to the president, then he would have insisted it be included in the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, known to many as Obamacare. Time will tell if this plan is affordable and protects our health, as suggested by the law’s name.  Put me in the deeply skeptical category.

Yes, the president is a facile orator. The State of His Rhetoric is strong. The State of the Union, however…
Labels:

Comments

  1. Toni Brayer, MDJanuary 31, 2011 at 2:03 PM

    Who cares about the motive. This is a real breakthrough and it's high time it gets addressed. Hopefully the republicans will run with it.

    ReplyDelete
  2. AriellaJanuary 31, 2011 at 10:05 PM

    I think it's all about the buildup- you start slow until you hit the crescendo. Although I'm glad the president talked about malpractice, I have a feeling that the two wars America is fighting are a little bit higher on his priority list...

    In any case, the fact that something was or was not in his healthcare plan might have more to do with trying to get the bill passed, and less to do with what is actually important.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Michael Kirsch, M.D.February 1, 2011 at 8:11 AM

    Ariella, nice to have you back on the blog. I agree with you that war is a higher priority than medical malpractice reform, and I thought the latter seemed a bit 'stuck in' the president's speech, as if it didn't belong there. Personally, I don't think the president has much passion for this issue and I don't expect to see much traction on it.

    ReplyDelete
  4. tracyFebruary 1, 2011 at 12:06 PM

    My favorite part was "Win The Future" WTF?????

    ReplyDelete
  5. A. BaileyFebruary 2, 2011 at 12:39 PM

    As bad a term as Obama has had, he can reverse the whole thing if he handles the Egyptian crisis with skill and leadership. I for one don't think he can, but in the interest of national and global security I hope he does.

    Malpractice reform would also be nice.

    ReplyDelete
  6. AnonymousFebruary 4, 2011 at 1:46 PM

    Yawn. Saying "I want to rein in frivolous lawsuits" is meaningless. Those who spew that line don't really want "reform". They want to pay less in claims or premiums. Helping the victims of malpractice means little to them.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Michael Kirsch, M.D.February 4, 2011 at 5:03 PM

    I disagree that we are not interested to help victims of medical malpractice. Keep in mind that the vast majority of these victims are missed by the current system and are not compensated. Wouldn't this fact suggest that the medical liability system be reformed?

    ReplyDelete
  8. AnonymousFebruary 4, 2011 at 10:16 PM

    I'm sure you're "interested" in the abstract. But let's be honest, you're not interested in writing any checks to all those people that are missed, and neither is your insurer. It shows in the legislation your propose. Talk is cheap.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Michael Kirsch, M.D.February 5, 2011 at 7:23 AM

    Abstract? I'm told that I am a very concrete individual. I am interested in a system that compensates a high fraction of those who are victims of medical negligence and targets a low fraction of innocent physicians. Any argument here?

    ReplyDelete
  10. AnonymousFebruary 7, 2011 at 4:03 PM

    I wasn't commenting on your personality as a whole. Just your position on this issue. No one is arguing that your goals aren't worthy. Just the means that you offer to achieve them don't accomplish your goals in any way.

    ReplyDelete
  11. AnonymousFebruary 10, 2011 at 9:08 PM

    I am so glad that I read this post.

    ReplyDelete
  12. medical malpractice insurance companiesFebruary 10, 2011 at 9:12 PM

    You are not dreaming. All those things are happening in our community and the only thing that we can do is face it and try to get used to that fact.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Why Most Doctors Choose Employment

By
Increasingly, physicians today are employed and most of them willingly so.  The advantages of this employment model, which I will highlight below, appeal to the current and emerging generations of physicians and medical professionals.  In addition, the alternatives to direct employment are scarce, although they do exist.  Private practice gastroenterology practices in Cleveland, for example, are increasingly rare sightings.  Another practice model is gaining ground rapidly on the medical landscape.   Private equity (PE) firms have   been purchasing medical practices who are in need of capital and management oversight.   PE can provide services efficiently as they may be serving multiple practices and have economies of scale.   While these physicians technically have authority over all medical decisions, the PE partners can exert behavioral influences on physicians which can be ethically problematic. For example, if the PE folks reduce non-medical overhead, this may very directly affe
44 comments
Read more

Should Doctors Wear White Coats?

By
Many professions can be easily identified by their uniforms or state of dress. Consider how easy it is for us to identify a policeman, a judge, a baseball player, a housekeeper, a chef, or a soldier.  There must be a reason why so many professions require a uniform.  Presumably, it is to create team spirit among colleagues and to communicate a message to the clientele.  It certainly doesn’t enhance professional performance.  For instance, do we think if a judge ditches the robe and is wearing jeans and a T-shirt, that he or she cannot issue sage rulings?  If members of a baseball team showed up dressed in comfortable street clothes, would they commit more errors or achieve fewer hits?  The medical profession for most of its existence has had its own uniform.   Male doctors donned a shirt and tie and all doctors wore the iconic white coat.   The stated reason was that this created an aura of professionalism that inspired confidence in patients and their families.   Indeed, even today
36 comments
Read more

Electronic Medical Records vs Physicians: Not a Fair Fight!

By
Each work day, I enter the chamber of horrors also known as the electronic medical record (EMR).  I’ve endured several versions of this torture over the years, monstrosities that were designed more to appeal to the needs of billers and coders than physicians. Make sense? I will admit that my current EMR, called Epic, is more physician-friendly than prior competitors, but it remains a formidable adversary.  And it’s not a fair fight.  You might be a great chess player, but odds are that you will not vanquish a computer adversary armed with artificial intelligence. I have a competitive advantage over many other physician contestants in the battle of Man vs Machine.   I can type well and can do so while maintaining eye contact with the patient.   You must think I am a magician or a savant.   While this may be true, the birth of my advanced digital skills started decades ago.   (As an aside, digital competence is essential for gastroenterologists.) During college, I worked as a secretary
6 comments
Read more