Propaganda Spews as Tort Reformers Smell Blood
Contributor
(866) 735-1102 Ext 710
When President Obama gave mention in his speech the other night for the potential need of investigating whether any tort refom is necessary for the implementation of health care reform-- I was surprised. I was surprised because I am sure he has seen the same statistics that I have over the last several years. Those statistics clearly demonstrate that a tort crisis in medical malpractice does not exist and, in fact, has never exsted.
What the tort reformers will do to create a foundation for their propaganda was driven home when I received a copy of an article published in the Summit Daily News and written by Ken Gansmann. In his article, Mr. Gansmann cites a study conducted in 2006 by the Harvard School of Public Helath and Mr. Gansmann claims this study demonstrates that "about 40 percent of medical malpractice lawsuits filed in America were without merit". Having read the study when it originally came out and because I do not recall the study saying anything remotely similar to what Mr. Gansmann claims, I went back and took a look at some of the findings in the study:
- "...portraits of a malpractice system riddled with frivolous lawsuits are overblown"
- "...most malpractice claims involve medical error and serious injury..."
In fairness, the researchers did almost cite the 40% figure, which Mr. Gansmann claims represents the medical malpractice cases "without merit". What the researchers actually said was:
"The reviewers found that almost all of the claims involved a treatment-related injury. More than 90% involved a physical injury, which was generally severe (80% resulted in significant or major disability and 26% resulted in death). The reviewers judged that 63% of the injuries were due to error. The remaining 37% lacked evidence of error, although some were close calls."
The legitimate studies, which Mr. Gansmann and other tort reformers want to use to substantiate a tort reorm need, simply do not support their claims. In fact, there are no statistics that would substantiate any need to limit the constitutional rights of people to walk through the courthouse doors.
Once again, with tort reformers, it is smoke and mirrors, but no real substance. I hope the people asking for my vote read the actual studies.