|
|
Maryland Medical Liability Crisis
|
|
The Case for Liability Reform Now!
Malpractice
Insurance Subsidy Program Download the letter from
MedChi's President, Willarda Edwards, M.D., about the progress of
the "Implementation Bill" in the General Assembly.
UPDATED!
Download
"The
Case for Medical Liability Reform Now: The Disease and
the Cure."
For
information for your Patients Click
Here.
For a copy of
HB 2 Click
Here.
For a summary of HB 2 Click
Here.
For a Chart Comparing HB
2 and the Governor's Bill Click
Here.
Why MedChi
Supports Allowing HB 2 to Become Law Click
Here.
For Frequently Asked Questions about HB 2 Click
Here.
For Legislative Phone Numbers
Click
Here.
|
| 2/13/05 - MedChi
House of Delegates Report on Medical Liability Reform in
Maryland: 2005 and Beyond |
| |
1/31/2005 - House Majority
Leader Barve to Dr. Edwards: Liability Reform Fight
Continues
In a letter to MedChi President Willarda Edwards last week,
House Majority Leader Kumar Barve (D., Montg. Co.)
emphasized that there is strong bipartisan interest in
pushing for further liability reform in Annapolis, and
compared the
ongoing fight for liability reform to prior battles with
managed care. [Read
Del. Barve’s letter.]
Barve, together with a bipartisan group of veteran
legislators, is lead sponsor of MedChi-backed liability
reform bills, which will come out this week. Look for future
bulletins with their bill numbers and hearing dates.
Also, this week look for a letter from Dr. Edwards with
MedChi’s ongoing liability reform efforts and Annapolis
update. [Read Dr. Edwards’s letter
and memorandum] |
| 1/18/2005 - Frequently
Asked Questons about HB 2 |
| 1/6/2005 - Comparison
of Tort Reform Elements in House Bill and the Governor's
Bill |
| 1/4/2005 - MedChi
and the Maryland Hospital Association Joint Position
Statement on the Medical Liability Legislation (HB 2) |
|
12/30/2004 - MedChi and the Maryland
Hospital Association joint statement on the special session. a copy of the statement
|
|
10/19/2004 - MedChi and the Maryland Hospital
Association (MHA) jointly issued a letter to every member of the
Maryland General Assembly, as they prepare for a rare special
legislative session on.
MedChi and MHA are firm in urging the legislators to come together
both on substantial reforms and on a funding source for an
insurance rate stabilization program. MedChi and MHA are not
wedded to any particular funding source, but they are on record in
support of eliminating the HMO tax exemption, as the federal
government and 29 other states have done.
|
|
10/5/2004 - 2004
Medical Liability Impact Survey Results In order to present an
accurate picture of the impact of Maryland's malpractice insurance crisis
on physicians and their patients, MedChi asked Maryland physicians to
complete the Medical Liability Impact Survey.
|
| 8/18/2004 - Doctors Give Testimony on MedMutual's Proposed Rate Increase
|
|
(You need free Adobe
Reader to read these.)
|
|
|
|
|
Here are Key Points About Why We Need
Medical Lawsuit Reform Now! |
| The
Problem |
Doctors in the prime of their careers are closing or
limiting their practices (not just OBs). Many are already moving to
other states or leaving private practice. Patients will not be able
to obtain medical care when and where they need it. |
| The
Cause |
Trial lawyers manipulate the court system, the media,
and their clients for jackpot awards, using junk science, phony
numbers and shrill advertising. They take 40% of every dollar their
clients receive (minimum), plus expenses, and injured patients typically get only 38%. In Maryland, a handful of lawyers receive
tens of millions of dollars every year from this system. They are
the ones fighting to stop medical lawsuit reform. |
| The
Remedy |
We must balance the need to compensate patients hurt
by negligence against the need for affordable insurance to pay for
that compensation. This means passing legislation in Annapolis to
enact these modest reforms, as many other states have done: |
| 1. |
Awards for medical expenses and lost wages
should be based on real, not phony numbers; |
| 2. |
More of the money awarded should go to the
injured patients, and less to lawyers; |
| 3. |
Awards for “pain and suffering”
(non-economic damages) should be capped at $350,000. |
|
|
