Groups Aim To Scrap Tennessee’s Medical Malpractice System

Malpractice cases can be costly.

There’s the insurance, which can run $100,000 or more. There are the awards when juries find doctors have done wrong.

And then there are all the tests that doctors perform simply to stave off litigation. Opponents of the current malpractice system say these “defensive medicine” practices add 20 percent to the cost of health care.

“So if we could make a dent in that, without impacting the quality of care that people are receiving, we think that’s a good thing,” says Jeff Segal, a neurosurgeon and the head of a group called Medical Justice.

The North Carolina-based organization aims to take malpractice cases away from judges and juries. They’re one of a few national groups hoping to make Tennessee the first state to do away with its medical malpractice system.

Segal says that would cut health care costs and foster better relationships between patients and doctors.

“It’s a blame and shame system,” he says. “In virtually every state, if you admit a mistake, you put your entire financial nest egg at risk.”

Lawmakers are likely to take up the debate when they gather in a few weeks for the legislative session. This spring, Segal and others plan to ask lawmakers in Tennessee and five other states to change their medical malpractice systems.

They hope to switch to a system modeled after the one used to settle worker’s comp claims. Instead of going through the courts, malpractice cases would be decided by panels led by doctors.

“Someone who’s in the system will be able to look at the record and analyze it fairly,” says Segal. “I mean a judge, give them credit, they are able to parse a lot of information. But a judge isn’t a neurosurgeon.”

Andy Spears leads Tennessee Citizen Action, a group that opposes the proposal.

“Doctors are protecting doctors, and that’s not a great system,” says Spears. “Doctors do great work, but in the few cases where there are mistakes, we think there ought to be some ways to hold them accountable.”

Spears argues that the current medical malpractice system is working fine. Judges and juries rarely approve large sums, but the threat of being penalized with one forces doctors to take extra precautions to avoid mistakes.

Spears believes backers of the plan have an additional motive. Six years ago, Tennessee lawmakers approved caps on damages in malpractice suits.

But since then, the state’s courts have called those caps into question. Rather than defend the limits, Spears says, medical groups are trying to set up an entirely new malpractice system.

“I believe the people bringing this want to go ahead and just get outside that debate altogether.”

A spokeswoman for the medical groups denies there’s any effort to sidestep the courts. She says their goal is only to bring down costs.