Medical Malpractice and Tort Reform

Paper Summary:

This paper explains that tort reform, putting a cap on jury awards in malpractice suits, is exactly what the insurers want because, in addition to making a handsome profit on their medical malpractice lines as it stands, they would then have to pay out even less. The author points out that reducing consumer health insurance costs would be better served by a systematic effort to weed out bad doctors and prevent malpractice. The paper stresses that, even if there were a link between medical malpractice insurance costs and consumer health insurance costs, the culprit is the insurer itself because it is not allowed, by law, to raise rates in response to big payouts; insurers are allowed to raise rates when their projected investment income declines.

From the Paper:

"The suggestive portion of the NAIC findings is this: although malpractice insurance premiums make up such a small portion of health-care costs, medical malpractice as a line of insurance demonstrated the highest profit as a percentage of premiums (Stewart, 21+), making it very lucrative for the insurance companies. Further, losses paid by those insurers in 1991 came to only about 31 cents of every $100 of health care costs; remember, malpractice premiums accounted for 64 cents per $100 spent, leaving 33 cents for the company out of each $100. While the amount spent on malpractice insurance by the consumer, trough his or her medical expenditures, is negligible, there are a lot of people spending $100 frequently, massing up piles of 33 cents for the insurers."

More papers on Medical Malpractice and Tort Reform:

• Persuasive Essay # 147456 : "Medical Malpractice & Tort Reform"
• Persuasive Essay # 145478 : "Medical Malpractice and Liability"
• Research Paper # 75151 : "Healthcare Industry and Medical Malpractice in the U.S."

APA Citation:

MLA Citation: