Patients may hear more sorrys from doctors

Thursday, Feb. 8, 2007 | 7:08 a.m.

CARSON CITY - Doctors typically are afraid to admit to a patient that they made a mistake for fear that it will spark a medical malpractice suit.

But a bill being prepared for introduction in the Nevada Senate would allow doctors to say, "I'm sorry," to patients without that being used in court as an admission of wrongdoing.

The bill is expected to fuel a new round in the debate over Nevada's medical malpractice law between attorneys for victims injured by doctors and, on the other side, insurance companies and physicians.

In 2002 and 2003, medical malpractice insurance rates skyrocketed, prompting companies - and doctors - to leave Nevada.

But the market has since stabilized with the passage of laws limiting malpractice suit financial awards and voters' approval of an initiative restricting attorney fees in such cases.

"Your reforms have had a positive impact," state Insurance Commissioner Alice Molasky-Arman told the Senate Judiciary Committee on Wednesday.

But Bill Bradley, a Reno attorney representing the Nevada Trial Lawyers Association, argued that the laws are stacked against victims, many of whom, he said, are "disappearing in despair" in their effort to bring malpractice suits.

Sen. Joe Heck, R-Henderson, is drafting the proposed "I'm sorry" law, which he said would allow a physician or health care provider "to admit they made a mistake and try to make the patient whole again without having that admission used against them in a later lawsuit."

Heck, a doctor, added that the bill would permit a doctor "to be human without that coming back to haunt him later."

It's estimated 18 states have some form of the so-called "I'm sorry" laws.

"When you look at the states where this law has been enacted and when you talk to people who have filed malpractice suits, most people are looking to have their wrong righted," Heck said.

If the measure becomes law, Heck envisions a scenario in which a physician would admit making a mistake and then tell a patient: "I want to give whatever treatment you need to get it taken care of. I want to make it right at no cost to you."

That's what has happened in other states that have adopted the "I'm sorry" law, he said.

Now, however, physicians are trained, he said, not to admit a mistake "because you know that when the lawsuit is filed, that admission is the first thing the (victim's) attorney uses against you."

Bradley said he wants to study Heck's bill before commenting on it and to examine how similar laws have worked in other states.

But he complained that Nevada's present laws favor the insurance companies and doctors.

A law passed by the Legislature in 2003 set a $350,000 limit on how much a wronged patient can collect for pain and suffering or loss of a loved one. Total awards, including compensation for treatment costs and actual monetary losses, can be higher than that figure.

And an initiative approved by voters in 2004 established a ceiling on attorney fees in malpractice cases, ranging from 40 percent of the first $50,000 recovered to 15 percent of any amount in excess of $600,000.

Those limits, Bradley said, favor insurance companies, which can hire the best attorneys available without concern over salary caps.

Bradley said his office receives 30 to 40 calls monthly about malpractice claims, but accepts three to five cases a year.

Larry Matheis, executive director of the Nevada State Medical Association, a group that represents doctors, said most physicians feel that the law and the initiative have "restored their confidence that they can afford to practice in Nevada."

Matheis also pointed out that numerous malpractice lawsuits continue to be filed, including an estimated 150 in District Court in Clark County during the last three months of 2006 .