Does Abusive Litigation Against Physicians Really Happening?

It's a good thing that the American Medical Association through its Litigation Center, has established safety nets for their members to avoid and/or cope with such kind of professional hazard.

Cases of abusive litigations against doctors, in which they've managed to assist successfully, are as follow:Albany Urology v. Cleveland; Arnold v. Lawrence & Memorial Hospital; Barbato v. Khetarpal; Coleman v. Deno; Flor v. Holguin; IHHI v. Fitzgibbon; In Re: Breast Implant Product Liability Litigation; Sigmon v. Southwest General Health Care Center; Stewart v. Gibson; United States v. Vargo; and Williamson v. Liptzin.

On all these cases, AMA have clearly expressed its strong interests to oppose abusive litigation against physicians; strive to avoid the expansion of liability theories against doctors, and opposed abusive medical malpractice court proceedings, which can lead to overzealous and abusive litigation- ever committed on preventing development of precedence that will misconstrue physician's role in the medical device stream of commerce and create physician liability for defective products used in the provision of medical services.

But, support of professional affiliations and organizations like AMA would never be enough to cover for doctors' losses and the need for tort reforms on medical malpractice is imperative.

Though the law has changed but, the changes are still not enough to prevent malicious claims to dominate. Innocent defendants were still forced to pay attorneys to defend themselves. Even if cases were eventually found lacking the merits that constitutes medical malpractice and were dismissed by the court; they still ought to pay for their defense.

The targets (physicians) were always left to choose among lesser evil choices of either out-of-court settlement; just to end the dragging scandal by giving in to the demands of the plaintiff, or continue the fight in court and absorb all the costs. And, it really helps a lot if the court catches it.

Just like last May 28, 2009,when U.S. District Judge Virginia Hernandez Covington dismissed, with prejudice, a federal lawsuit alleging false claims against Axiom Worldwide Inc. The lawsuit, filed by former Axiom employee Greg Westfall (who used to sell DRX spinal decompression device) and his wife on behalf of the United States under the federal False Claims Act.

The court have noted that qui tam suits "are motivated primarily by prospects of monetary reward, rather than public good" and "raise a high risk of abusive litigation."

So, in its conclusion it wrote: "[t]his court roundly refuses to open the door to discovery and litigation when, after three attempts, [the Westfalls] failed to file a complaint in compliance with Rule 9(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Thus, upon due consideration, this Court dismisses this case with prejudice."

Frivolous lawsuits and abusive litigations are not only found adversely affecting care but, also trigger for healthcare costs to go up and thereby affecting us all consumers.

To end this article, please allow me to share you this paragraph from www.physiciansforreforms.org:

"Contemporary medicine has lost its soul. Physicians are now pawns trapped in a failing healthcare system rather than practitioners of an ancient and noble art. Guidelines and government mandates strip physicians of their judgment and patients of their autonomy. Our broken medical/legal system pits patient against practitioner and steals the physician's intrinsic satisfaction and love of medicine," Physicians for Reforms.

Let's all be vigilant!

Resources: www.ama-assn.org; www.physiciansforreforms.org.

Related Articles: Medical Malpractice and Healthcare (http://public-healthcare-issues.suite101.com/article.cfm/medical_malpractice_and_healthcare)