Fr.Andrew

I'm not sure where I come down on the West Virginia doctor's strike--I can understand both sides. On the one hand, no one should be expected to pay 2/3ds of their income for insurance--on the other hand, medical screw-ups are expensive (at the least) to fix, and it's hard to draw the line.
I think doctors should be liable for demonstrable negligence, to be sure--but don't know how to determine that negligence or how to weed out frivolous lawsuits from greedy (healthy) patients and their "snakified" lawyers.
The problem W VA is facing (and that we all may face) is the loss of their medical community...not just the insurance-strapped surgeons and GPs, but support people as well will have to find some other way to make a living. Surgical nurses, OR techs, anesthesiologists, orderlies--right down to the fellow who sells you a newspaper when you walk in the door. As trained medical people enter other fields, and as young people reject medicine as too expensive a career (on top of the already high cost of school), the quality and availability of care (for us all) will decline.
What to do?
Do doctors have a moral obligation to minister to the sick?
Do they have a moral right to withhold their services to protest a perceived threat to their livelihood and profession?

Amen-Moses

Doctors in the UK (in fact all medical staff not just docs) are moving to private health trusts purely because they have insurance policies provided for them. This is effectively destroying the NHS because the state refuses to pick up the tab for legal actions.

The effect of this is that those who can afford private health care get the best treatment and those who cannot have to sign non-sueing agreements before being treated by the second rate service.

Amen-Moses

L. Noctivagans

A-M: Sounds sort of like how it is here in America, except the second option doesn't actually exist.

happyboy

you know, it must a lot of dedication and care for someone to become a doctor in america. considering the fact that a doctor gives up a good chunk of his or her salary to insurance, and can and will be sued at the drop of a hat by irate or grieving patients, it's a wonder that anyone has the energy to be a doctor.

happyboy

Tom Sawyer

I'm firmly on the side of the doctors in this one. While I know that negligence does happen and people should be held accountable for that, having to pay six figures a year in malpractice insurance is outrageous. It drives doctors away from the community and everyone suffers as a result.

There should be caps on the amount of damages that can be asked for in malpractice suits. Mistakes happen and while they are tragic they are less serious than what the situation will be if doctors refuse to perform in certain areas due to out of control insurance rates, as they are starting to do now. They train for years and take on a difficult job and if it becomes so that it's not financially viable for them to practice anymore, everyone loses out instead of a few unfortunate people who are on the receiving end of negligent behaviour.

JerryM

I am a health care provider. I work for a large hospital which is self-insured, so I don't pay for any professional liability insurance directly. But I know how stressful it is for many of my colleagues. Missouri does have caps on non-economic damages, so we have less of a problem than some other states. To be fair, although the tort system has problems, the insurance industry underpriced malpractice policies in the recent past--and with the stagnant stock market, they are making up for their underperforming investments by jacking up their premiums--to incredible levels in some places (like W. Va, PA, NV) I personally would like to see most medical malpractice taken out of the traditional adversarial tort system and have these cases heard by experienced binding arbitration panels. The cases would be resolved faster and with less cost; and experienced arbitrators would less likely be swayed by emotionalism and questionable expert testimony. But something should also be done on the insurance regulation side to limit unreasonable and unfair pricing of policies.

SmartBlonde57

I live in Pennsylvania, where doctors are leaving in droves and moving to New Jersey.

I have heard some talk about pending legislation which, if passed, will lower the mandatory malpractice insurance amounts, thereby making the premiums more affordable. I hope it goes through before I get *really* sick.

Keith Russell

Greetings:

Do doctors have a moral obligation to minister to the sick?

It could be argued that a person who chose to no longer minister to the sick, would no longer be a 'doctor'.

Do they have a moral right to withhold their services to protest a perceived threat to their livelihood and profession?

I wouldn't want to go under the knife of a resentful person who felt they were being forced to work, with the possibility of not being paid.

Just me...

Keith.

Fr.Andrew

(Fr Andrew): Do doctors have a moral obligation to minister to the sick?

(Keith Russell): It could be argued that a person who chose to no longer minister to the sick, would no longer be a 'doctor'.

(Fr Andrew): I'm sorry...poor choice of words. I suppose I mean to ask whether or not those trained to heal the sick are under a moral obligation to do so.

Ronin

The "Money vs. Human Life" quandry, yet again...I can't seem to find much sympathy for the plight of these doctors.

I hope they don't starve to death from lack of pay before someone dies from lack of care.