carson city:

Bill to lift medical malpractice cap advances

Monday, April 20, 2009 | 1:42 p.m.

Legislative panel approves medical malpractice bill (4-10-09)
Lawmakers debate medical negligence bill (4-6-09)
Attorneys hope to lift malpractice damages cap (3-31-09)

Archive of Sun health stories

The Nevada Assembly passed a bill Monday that would lift the medical malpractice cap of $350,000 for non-economic damages in cases of "gross negligence."

The bill passed 26-15, with Democratic Assemblymen Harvey Munford and Morse Arberry joining Republicans against the bill.

The issue has gained momentum after the Hepatitis C outbreak last year in Las Vegas.

Republicans argued that easing the cap would scare doctors out of Nevada by raising insurance rates for doctors.

"We have a challenge of getting enough doctors in Nevada," said Assemblyman Joe Hardy, a doctor from Boulder City. "This will decrease the level of care.

Assemblywoman Sheila Leslie, D-Reno, said, "I agree we need access to health care. I also think we need access to justice when somebody has been harmed by the medical system."

Assemblyman James Settelmeyer, R-Gardnerville, pointed out that voters in 2004 passed the cap.

At the time, doctors and health care advocates put on a major public relations blitz that argued Nevada was losing doctors because of high insurance premiums. Trial lawyers and others argue that it was a contrived crisis.

The present law limits non-economic damages in medical malpractice suits to $350,000. This bill would permit unlimited damages for instances of gross negligence. It would also give patients an extra year to determine if they should bring suit.

Discussion: 8 comments so far…

By sfdoc1979

4/20/09 at 4:22 p.m.

Suggest removal

Are you kidding me? This is is being brought up again?? As a medicine resident in one the hospitals in town, I am ashamed to say if this is passed, I will be gone in 2 years when I am done. The government is already involved to much in the healthcare system in this country and this will be the last straw for me and many other docs in this community. It is sad that people are voting on emotion and paranoia because of the fact that a few foolish GI docs got sloppy and chose to ruin their careers because they were greedy. Politicians need to listen to physicians and not foolish Trial Lawyers or extreme left-wing bureaucrats who think litigation is the answer to everything. If the legislature cares about the physician shortage and healthcare system in general in this state, they must kill this bill before it has chance to become law. To fail do so will prove costly to the public health in this community.
By afveteran

4/20/09 at 6:14 p.m.

Suggest removal

Don't worry yourself. The bill will die before it becomes law. The senate or the governor will kill this frivolous bill.
By neiman1

4/20/09 at 6:55 p.m.

Suggest removal

The passing of the bill would drive up insurance costs immediately. The insurance companies wont wait for the awards, they start charging for the risks this bill creates for the doctors and hospitals. What are these democrats doing except paying off the trial lawyers for their kind support in the last election.
By UNLVStud

4/20/09 at 8:08 p.m.

Suggest removal

Looks like the Doctors scare tactics have worked on all of you. Limiting awards on damages against doctors who are grossly negligent in their care (that means an extreme deviation from of care from what a well-trained, experienced doctor would perform) doesn't serve any interest in justice.

For those individuals that have contracted terminal diseases, lost limbs, or lost one of the 5 senses due to a careless doctor, this is the only recourse they have. To limit their awards to a measly $350,000 is a slap in the face to those people that have suffered at the hands of a grossly negligent doctor.

The bill will likely die in the Senate or the Luv Guv will use what little power he has left to hurt the little guy once again. This bill would have filled a hole in the justice system and, therefore, it should be passed.
By Randy

4/20/09 at 9:43 p.m.

Suggest removal

@sfdoc
I'm not in favor of this change, but it likely wouldn't be arising if the medical community would do a better job of policing itself. There were rumblings of things being amiss with Dr. Desai's practice for years. One didn't have to know about vial reusage. All that one needed to know was that the volume of patients was far too high. BOMEX needs to get serious and get assertive about identifying and disciplining poor practitioners.
By castle

4/20/09 at 11:14 p.m.

Suggest removal

I do not know if a removal of the cap would raise paitent cost very much or not. I do think that some day our medical insurance will be well over 25% of your gross income and those without insurance will not receive care including emergency care unless we do something about the costs.
By Berkley48072

4/24/09 at 12:53 p.m.

Suggest removal

The only people who benefit from medical malpractive caps are those who own insurance companies. What gets forgotten is that the truly frivolous cases almost never result in large verdicts. The vast majority of them are thrown out of court. It is the victim of the truly meritorius case that is hurt by caps because, no matter how egregious the conduct of the doctor and no matter how badly the victim is harmed, he/she is limited in the recovery. Meanwhile, in most states where these caps were passed, the doctors experienced no real decrease in medical malpractice premiums. So what is actually going on? Here's all you need to know - the top 15 medical malpractice insurance carriers in the country raised their rates 120% between 2000-2004. Typically, they claimed the rates were increased because of increased medical malpractice payouts. But, how much had their payouts actually increased during that same time? 6% !!! That's right, 114% of the increase in premiums was attributable to something other than malpractice suits - insurance company greed. What is needed is not a law that prevents innocent victims from being compensated for their injuries. What is needed is insurance reform that prevents insurance companies from raising their rates 114% in just 4 years out of greed.
By Nick

4/24/09 at 1:18 p.m.

Suggest removal

This is a horrible idea. It will escalate insurance costs and drive doctors away.

Wake up people. Dear god, I agree with republicans.