Mitchell Holman
03-17-2005, 06:54 AM
Texas Study Casts Doubt on Need for Tort Reform
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/print?id=567179
Mar. 10, 2005 - A study released on Thursday cast doubt
on whether recent "tort reform" in Texas that limited
payouts in medical malpractice lawsuits and is similar
to what President Bush wants nationally was really needed.
The study looked at Texas Department of Insurance records
dating back to 1988 and found claims that medical costs
were soaring because of too many malpractice lawsuits, the
supposed reason for the reform, were not true.
"We find no evidence of the medical malpractice crisis that
produced headlines over the last several years and led to
legal reform in Texas and other states," said the study,
conducted by law professors at the University of Texas,
University of Illinois and Columbia University law schools.
Only a few states have comprehensive insurance databases
like that of Texas, said David Hyman, one of the study
authors, but similar studies elsewhere have found nothing
to indicate a link between litigation and rising medical
costs.
"Everyone who is collecting data is finding more or less
the same thing -- there is no evidence of a tort crisis,"
he told Reuters.
"The clear implication is that 'runaway medical malpractice
litigation' makes a poor poster child for the cause of tort
reform," said the study, which was released at the Texas law
school in Austin.
In 2003, in response to the alleged litigation crisis, Texas
passed a law placing a $250,000 cap on certain damages in
medical malpractice lawsuits.
But the study found that insurance payouts, jury awards in
malpractice lawsuits and costs of legal defense had changed
little between 1988 and 2002. The only thing that jumped, they
said, was the cost of malpractice insurance, which rose 135
percent from 1999 to 2003 likely because of financial pressures
that had nothing to do with litigation.
Bush, who backed tort reform when he was governor of Texas, is
now calling for a federal law imposing the same $250,000 cap
in malpractice lawsuits.
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/print?id=567179
Mar. 10, 2005 - A study released on Thursday cast doubt
on whether recent "tort reform" in Texas that limited
payouts in medical malpractice lawsuits and is similar
to what President Bush wants nationally was really needed.
The study looked at Texas Department of Insurance records
dating back to 1988 and found claims that medical costs
were soaring because of too many malpractice lawsuits, the
supposed reason for the reform, were not true.
"We find no evidence of the medical malpractice crisis that
produced headlines over the last several years and led to
legal reform in Texas and other states," said the study,
conducted by law professors at the University of Texas,
University of Illinois and Columbia University law schools.
Only a few states have comprehensive insurance databases
like that of Texas, said David Hyman, one of the study
authors, but similar studies elsewhere have found nothing
to indicate a link between litigation and rising medical
costs.
"Everyone who is collecting data is finding more or less
the same thing -- there is no evidence of a tort crisis,"
he told Reuters.
"The clear implication is that 'runaway medical malpractice
litigation' makes a poor poster child for the cause of tort
reform," said the study, which was released at the Texas law
school in Austin.
In 2003, in response to the alleged litigation crisis, Texas
passed a law placing a $250,000 cap on certain damages in
medical malpractice lawsuits.
But the study found that insurance payouts, jury awards in
malpractice lawsuits and costs of legal defense had changed
little between 1988 and 2002. The only thing that jumped, they
said, was the cost of malpractice insurance, which rose 135
percent from 1999 to 2003 likely because of financial pressures
that had nothing to do with litigation.
Bush, who backed tort reform when he was governor of Texas, is
now calling for a federal law imposing the same $250,000 cap
in malpractice lawsuits.
