GOP Proposes New Limits to Medical Malpractice Cases
Get Legal Help Today
Secured with SHA-256 Encryption
UPDATED: Aug 24, 2017
It’s all about you. We want to help you make the right legal decisions.
We strive to help you make confident insurance and legal decisions. Finding trusted and reliable insurance quotes and legal advice should be easy. This doesn’t influence our content. Our opinions are our own.
Editorial Guidelines: We are a free online resource for anyone interested in learning more about legal topics and insurance. Our goal is to be an objective, third-party resource for everything legal and insurance related. We update our site regularly, and all content is reviewed by experts.
A bill now before the US House of Representatives would limit “non-economic” damages in medical malpractice cases to $250,000.
As NPR reports,
Non-economic damages cover losses that are hard to put a dollar amount on — such as suffering, loss of a limb, pain, and loss of companionship. In addition, medical malpractice awards may include monetary damages to cover medical costs and loss of future wages. Sometimes punitive damages may be awarded as well, as punishment for reckless or other harmful behavior.
About half of US states already impose a cap on non-economic damages in medical malpractice cases.
The proposed federal cap would override any state law that prohibited such a cap.
Some state courts have struck down caps on non-economic damages in medical malpractice cases, finding that they violated the equal protection provisions of the state constitutions.
The medical malpractice bill, H.R. 1215, is among a number of proposed legal changes in conjunction with the American Health Care Act (AHCA).
The Republic-controlled House is trying to replace the Affordable Care Act (ACA — also known as “Obamacare”) with the AHCA.
The Senate has its own version of an Obamacare replacement.
As CNN reports,
[the] nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office estimated that if the Senate bill becomes law, 22 million more Americans would be uninsured by 2026 than if Obamacare remained in place.
23 million fewer people would be uninsured under the House version.
The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimates that H.R. 1215 would lower health care costs by reducing premiums for medical liability insurance, thus reducing costs for healthcare providers.
The bill would also impose a three-year statute of limitations for medical malpractice lawsuits, or a one-year limit starting from the time a consumer discovered — or should have discovered — a medical malpractice injury (such as a surgical sponge left inside a patient’s body).
The amount of attorney fees that lawyers can recover for taking on medical malpractice cases would also be limited under the bill. This might discourage lawyers from taking on such cases and leave some injured consumers without legal recourse.
According to the CBO, savings would be almost $50 billion over 10 years.
However, according to an op-ed in the Huffington Post by Joanne Doroshow, the Executive Director of the Center for Justice & Democracy (CJ&D) at New York Law School,
H.R. 1215 would quite literally immunize the health care industry for most kinds of misconduct, from horrendous medical malpractice in hospitals, to nursing home abuse and neglect, to sexual assault by doctors.
Doroshow says the bill would also limit the liability of companies that produce drugs or medical devices that turn out to be harmful.
Americans for Insurance Reform, a collection of almost 100 consumer and public interest groups representing more than 50 million consumers, has published studies that suggest medical malpractice claims are not to blame for high health care costs.
According to the CJ&D,
When adjusted for medical care inflation, both premiums and claims per physician are currently at their lowest level in four decades.