Senate weighs alternatives to medical liability system

Special health courts are among the models that would be studied under the legislation.

By Amy Lynn Sorrel, AMNews staff. July 17, 2006.

Physicians, lawyers and patient advocacy groups are wrangling over a bill that would test health courts and other ways to help curb rising medical liability costs, while aiming to treat both physicians and patients fairly.

The Fair and Reliable Medical Justice Act would authorize the Dept. of Health and Human Services to fund state pilot projects for three alternatives to resolve medical liability claims outside the current court system. The debate came during a June 22 Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee hearing held on the measure, sponsored by committee Chair Sen. Michael B. Enzi (R, Wyo.).

The approaches that would be studied are early disclosure and compensation, in which a doctor would offer to compensate the injured patient; administrative determination of compensation, in which a state board would settle claims; and health courts, in which specially trained judges, rather than juries, would hear cases. Under all three systems, noneconomic awards would be paid according to a monetary schedule.

While the medical liability debate persists on Capitol Hill, "we ought to lend a hand to states and encourage them to create alternatives that would be more fair and predictable for both patients and health care providers," Enzi said.

Doctor groups stressed that their priority remains federal reforms that include a $250,000 cap on noneconomic damages, but they endorsed the bill as one that could help eliminate the threat of excessive litigation. The current legal system can lead to defensive medicine and an erosion of the doctor-patient relationship, they said.