liability insurance crisis

I had asked a lawyer friend about going bare- he said they would put a lien or whatever it is called, on your paycheck for the rest of your life or until you pay off the judgement.

8O Wow, that would take a while. I have heard of people doing this -- putting all assets in their spouse's name -- to avoid lawsuits or creditors. I haven't heard of drs doing it because of malpractice. I always wondered if it would work, though, and figured there would be some way for a person or creditor to get around it. I also wondered if that would cause any problems if the spouse holding the assets died unexpectedly.

I can't believe that lawyers in FLA are saying that doctors cutting back on their practice is equivalent to malpractice. Give me a break! I thought their indentured servitude was over with residency! What contrasting opinions on doctors....on one side you have lawyers saying that doctors are beholden to their patients for their entire career and basically can't have a life -- like some sort of debt to the public....on another you have people muttering and complaining about the salaries that doctors make because they really don't do THAT much (didn't school that much, invest that much, pay that much, etc)....

A note about the whole "going bare" thing....

There is a peds neurosurgeon here in KC that is doing exactly that. Last year he made about $400K and his insurance premiums went from $125K to over $280k for this year, even though he has never had anything brought up against him...he has been in practice for more than 12 years.
Sounds pretty crazy to me, but I suppose you do what you need to do to make your living and be able to keep it.

A note about the whole "going bare" thing....

There is a peds neurosurgeon here in KC that is doing exactly that. Last year he made about $400K and his insurance premiums went from $125K to over $280k for this year, even though he has never had anything brought up against him...he has been in practice for more than 12 years.
Sounds pretty crazy to me, but I suppose you do what you need to do to make your living and be able to keep it.

WOW! 8O
Who pays the premiums? In this case, does he pay them personally or does his practice pay them? I know that it's a lot either way and if the practice pays that cuts into the bottom line and productivity bonuses. But to pay that personally....ouch.

[DCJenn]

This is exactly why my husband has proclaimed for all to hear that he will NEVER practice medicine as a civilian. Even if he wanted to moonlight, he'd have to be licensed in the state where we are and then get civilian malpractice insurance- and it's not worth it.

Jenn

[PrincessFiona]

moonlighting

Well, Jenn....the good thing about moonlighting is that more often than not, the facility pays for your malpractice.....and with him being military, he can just moonlight at any VA

kris

[DCJenn]

Kris-

I hadn't thought about it him going to the VA hospitals- maybe he could during his year of adult neurology if he wanted to. He still couldn't moonlight at a civilian hospital because he's licensed in Indiana- the least expensive state to get a license. I'm sure that per capita Indiana has more physicians than most states- at least 6 other peds residents in my husband's class alone got their licenses in Indiana!

Jenn

[mommax3]

That Indiana thing may start to change, though -- DH just had to renew his license and the fee had gone up considerably since the first time.

Sally

Here's a link (current as of 7/5/03) to a New York Times article on malpractice reform. The Senate has a bill that will be introduced on Monday to cap pain and suffering awards at $250K. It sounds unlikely that it will pass.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=s ... senatevote

So, here's my question for any legal types out there or anyone who knows more about this. What, exactly, does pain and suffering cover? For example, say someone is victim to serious medical malpractice that requires them to have home nursing care for the rest of their life. Would there be a separate award to cover on-going medical costs or loss of income associated with the injury? If not, I think that $250K does sound rather low for a really serious case. I wonder if there is any sort of adjustment in the legislation to figure in inflation in later years.

My only experience with this is testifying in a civil case for a friend who was in a car accident (I saw her immediately after the accident). She had on-going back problems. The car insurance company paid for her associated medical bills and physical therapy. But, 5 years later she still needs to see a doctor sometimes and it is covered by her personal health insurance and she doesn't have major on-going expenses. She was rewarded around $25K for her "pain and suffering" -- I guess that is for the fact that she will have back pain for the rest of her life. (Testifying was no picnic! It was interesting to see first-hand what it was like to be part of a trial. But the trial date fell during one of Eric's sceduled vacation weeks and really screwed up our plans. ).

[Michele]

I think pain and sufffering is the "emotional" part of the settlement. So you get the physical stuff covered, but then yhe victim is left with emotional damage and stress and the "pain and suffering" money is supposed to alleviate that.

Michele

[Rapunzel]

8O Wow, that would take a while. I have heard of people doing this -- putting all assets in their spouse's name -- to avoid lawsuits or creditors. I haven't heard of drs doing it because of malpractice. I always wondered if it would work, though, and figured there would be some way for a person or creditor to get around it. I also wondered if that would cause any problems if the spouse holding the assets died unexpectedly.

According to what we were told while my husband was a med student and then an intern in Dallas, the above practice is done fairly often by North Texas physicians and apparently it works in Texas. I don't know if it would work with other states' laws, though.

Of the people I have heard who did this, one was a small business owner and the other an owner of a small construction company. The construction guy was following what the small business guy (SBG) did. SBG did this because his company went into bankruptcy. Because of the structure of his company, creditors started going after his personal assets. He was able to get the company back on its feet and started earning a very decent salary again. He changed the structure of his company so that it would be harder to hold him personally liable and then put all of their assets in his wife's name. I don't know if a lawyer suggested this or not and his situation hasn't been tested. While I see how it works -- go ahead, sue me, I don't have anything -- I wonder if it would *really* hold up.

It makes sense, though, that all future wages could be garnished until the settlement was paid off. I guess your assets would be safe but not your income? Unless you quit working??