Opinion Editorials
Email
Print
Medical Malpractice
ADVERTISEMENT
Published: September 8, 2008
The choices we make regarding the right doctor and course of treatment cannot be taken lightly. Therefore, North Carolinians must have access to as much information as possible.
That's why new malpractice disclosure rules developed by the N.C. Medical Board will improve medical care in this state and, we hope, increase the confidence that patients can place in their caregivers. Physicians, understandably, are concerned that the new openness will cause them unfair harm, but this is where a widening of the available of information will certainly improve their situations, also.
The 2007 General Assembly decided that patients should have greater access to the malpractice histories of North Carolina physicians and physician assistants. In the legislation, the medical board was authorized to write rules to put that law into effect. The rules have now cleared the N.C. Rules Review Commission and are on the brink of becoming effective.
Under the rules, the public will be able to go online and find medical malpractice payments of more than $25,000 made by physicians and physician assistants after Oct. 1, 2007. Also available will be information related to any criminal convictions of the doctor or assistant and any disciplinary actions taken against them by the medical board here or in another state.
The state's physicians are nervous, and that anxiety is understandable.
Not all malpractice suits are equal. Sometimes, the insurance companies that defend doctors prefer to settle with the patient because doing so will cost less than the legal fees involved in a malpractice defense. This is especially so in relatively small cases where the facts are ambiguous.
Advocates for the doctors and assistants say it isn't fair to post the settlement on the Internet in such cases. They also say they will be less willing to settle in the future if they are going to be haunted by these public records.
That's why these advocates are trying to delay implementation of the rules. They want the General Assembly to review, and maybe change, them.
That's not necessary. Settlements made before the law took effect last year aren't publicly available. Anyone who settled after Oct. 1, 2007, knew the information would be public.
These advocates should also be lobbying for the release of as much information as possible. Potential patients who are willing to do this kind of research in the selection process will also be willing to read a file that shows the mitigating circumstances regarding the settlement. For example, one good indicator that the doctor may have settled to avoid trial would be the absence of disciplinary action against him or her.
The public needs this information, and the more the state allows us to know about our caregivers, the better off everyone will be.
Email
Print
ADVERTISEMENT
See community events or add your own! Click here!
Advertisement
