Wednesday, March 16, 2005 | 9:39 a.m.
WASHINGTON -- A federal cap on medical malpractice jury awards would help stem an exodus of obstetricians from the profession, a Las Vegas doctor said Tuesday at a Capitol Hill event.
Valley Hospital chief of staff R. Marcus Vennart stood at a media event amid dozens of other physicians from around the country who support a bill co-sponsored by Sen. John Ensign, R-Nev., that would cap non-economic malpractice awards at $250,000.
Ensign, joined by Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn., and two other Republican senators, renewed their call for action this year on legislation Ensign has long advocated.
Ensign says soaring malpractice insurance rates are driving doctors in many states out of business. The senator and many of the nation's doctors put much of the blame on lawyers seeking massive jury awards.
"If you think this problem is going away, it's not," Ensign said. "It's getting worse."
Vennart said his malpractice insurance rates went from $28,000 to $90,000 in four years. One of his three partners left their practice two years ago because of skyrocketing rates. Now his insurance provider, American Physicians Assurance, is leaving the state, dropping his coverage in July.
"At some point you can't keep the doors open," Vennart said after the press conference. "There has to be a reasonable limit (on awards)."
Jim Breeden of Carson City said his 18-doctor practice suffered when Farmers Insurance Group abandoned the practice last year.
"We had to scramble to find insurance coverage," said Breeden, who also trekked to the Capitol this week.
His practice found a new provider at greater cost and got stuck paying a "tail fee" to Farmers for additional coverage that covers doctors in case past patients file complaints, Breeden said.
Breeden scoffed at lawyers who say there is no crisis. He points to states like Nevada where doctors dropped their practices to move to states with lower insurance rates.
"Physicians are leaving these states in droves," he said.
In a national debate that sometimes pits lawyers against doctors, the Association of Trial Lawyers of America opposes the legislation. The group says the bill would not ultimately lower insurance rates, pointing to states, including Nevada, where state-approved caps have not immediately lowered rates. That's because courts have not yet ruled on the cap's constitutionality, cap supporters say.
Bill supporters stress that the legislation does not limit jury awards on economic damages.
But the legislation eliminates the right to fair non-economic "pain and suffering" compensation for patients who endure severe injuries as a result of malpractice, the lawyers group says.
"Their legislation would apply in every case no matter how serious the injury or how appalling the negligence of the health care provider," said Carlton Carl, a spokesman for the lawyers group.
Carl's group advocates insurance reform. He said the Ensign-backed cap is a "Washington knows best" strategy that doesn't trust juries. He said the number of big jury awards was not spiraling.
"There are not wild fluctuations in (jury) payouts," Carl said. "There are wild fluctuations in malpractice insurance rates. Doctors are being gouged."
Bill backers once again this year face opposition in Congress from a number of Democrats, including Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada.
archive
