 |
|
|
|
Malpractice bill prognosis is iffy A few months ago, groups representing doctors and trial lawyers were hopeful that they could agree on a way to overhaul Tennessee's medical malpractice laws. But the prospects for final passage became cloudier this week. Now, an executive with a doctors' group questions whether further compromise is possible. "If it doesn't mirror the Senate's version as it stands now, I don't think we'll see anything this year," said Russ Miller, senior vice president for the Tennessee Medical Association. The outcome of the debate could have a major effect on doctors, attorneys, hospitals and patients in Tennessee. For years, doctors have pushed for changes that would make it harder for patients to sue health care workers for alleged medical mistakes and would limit damages when they win. They say most lawsuits against doctors are frivolous, which drives up health care costs and makes it harder for doctors to work in Tennessee. Trial lawyers say the threat of lawsuits helps protect patients from medical mistakes. This year, the sides agreed to back measures including a requirement that lawyers must sign a certificate of good faith that they had consulted with a medical witness before filing a malpractice lawsuit. Doctors dropped their demand for limits on jury awards for non-economic damages such as pain and suffering. Miller said doctors have compromised enough and won't accept trial lawyers' efforts to kill a measure known as the "locality rule." Current law requires that expert witnesses in a medical malpractice case come from Tennessee or a neighboring state and must be familiar with the practice of medicine in the place where the alleged malpractice happened. Miller said the measure is necessary to prevent trial lawyers from bringing in doctors from other regions to act as "hired guns" in trials. Trial lawyers want the rule to be changed to allow experts to be qualified if they are familiar with the standard of care at the state level. But some argue that doctors could also benefit from testimony by experts from outside the area. "The locality rule has merit for both sides. It depends on which health care professional you ask," said Sen. Mark Norris, R-Collierville, who has backed doctors in the debate. Norris said a compromise may be possible in the next three or four weeks before the General Assembly adjourns its 2007 session. If not, the bill could face an easier time next year. Because 2008 is the second year of a two-year General Assembly, it would only have to win approval in the House to become law. It would return to the Senate only if the House passes a different version. In the House, Rep. Rob Briley, D-Nashville, is the leading advocating for changing the locality rule -- and for blocking the bill if a move to a statewide rule isn't adopted. He chairs the House Judiciary Committee, where the bill was returned to from the floor. The committee has shut down for the year, leading some observers to believe the bill is dead for the year, but Briley said the committee can reopen if a compromise is reached. Briley said he was disappointed that the amendment killing the locality rule wasn't accepted. "Sen. Norris and I had a firm understanding that the locality rule amendment would be included," he said. A representative of the Tennessee Trial Lawyers Association was unavailable Friday. |
