Free Daily Headlines :

  • COVID-19
  • Vaccine Info
  • Money
  • Politics
  • Education
  • Health
  • Justice
  • More
    • Environment
    • Economic Development
    • Gaming
    • Investigations
    • Social Services
    • TRANSPORTATION
  • Opinion
    • CT Viewpoints
    • CT Artpoints
DONATE
Reflecting Connecticut’s Reality.
    COVID-19
    Vaccine Info
    Money
    Politics
    Education
    Health
    Justice
    More
    Environment
    Economic Development
    Gaming
    Investigations
    Social Services
    TRANSPORTATION
    Opinion
    CT Viewpoints
    CT Artpoints

LET�S GET SOCIAL

Show your love for great stories and out standing journalism

Doctors reconsider SustiNet support after liability protection withdrawn

  • by Arielle Levin Becker
  • March 8, 2011
  • View as "Clean Read" "Exit Clean Read"

Physician groups on Tuesday blasted a decision by lawmakers to remove a medical liability protection provision from the proposed SustiNet bill, and some doctors suggested that it could undermine the effort to create a state-run health insurance plan.

“It wouldn’t shock me if we come out actually in opposition to the bill,” said Dr. David S. Katz, president of the Connecticut State Medical Society, which represents more than 7,000 doctors and medical students and previously supported SustiNet. “I see our support as questionable at best.”

katz and mclean

Physicians David Katz and Robert McLean: Ending liability protection will limit doctor participation

The Connecticut Chapter of the American College of Physicians, the Connecticut Academy of Family Physicians and the Connecticut Chapter of the American Academy of Pediatrics also are urging lawmakers to restore the liability provision.

Malpractice liability has long been a major concern for doctors, and many cheered the provision included in the proposed SustiNet bill, which calls for joining state-funded health insurance pools and offering state-run insurance coverage to the public. The provision would have protected health care providers from liability if they injure a patient covered by SustiNet while following clinical care guidelines. It was intended as a way to promote evidence-based practice and to control costs by reducing defensive medicine–doctors’ impulse to order tests or procedures based on fear of being sued, rather than on medical judgment.

But lawmakers removed the liability section from the version of the bill that passed the Public Health Committee Monday. Committee co-chairwoman Rep. Elizabeth B. Ritter, D-Waterford, said the provision was removed in response to concerns that limiting liability for injuries to SustiNet patients would create a double standard in the judicial system.

“It seemed to be that we were trying to use a health insurance program bill to solve really a judicial system issue,” she said. “From a policy standpoint, that wasn’t going to work too well.”

Several Republican lawmakers on the Public Health Committee criticized the decision to remove the provision, saying it missed an opportunity to address the costs associated with defensive medicine, although they also opposed the bill on other grounds. Ritter suggested that malpractice reform could be addressed through separate legislation.

She also noted that the bill is not yet in final form. It will likely be amended as it moves through the legislature. It is now awaiting action by the Insurance and Real Estate Committee, and must also pass through the Government Administration and Elections, Appropriations, Human Services, Labor and Public Employees, and Finance, Revenue and Bonding committees before reaching the House floor.

“If anyone has any other suggestions, hey, bring them on, we’re always happy to talk,” Ritter said.

The liability provision drew criticism during a public hearing last month from people who had been harmed by health care providers and from trial lawyers, who raised questions about the feasibility of the proposal and criticized the idea of “giving doctors the right to harm patients without compensating them simply because they complied with guidelines.”

Doctors expressed frustration that legislators removed the liability provision, which had been recommended by the nine-member board that designed SustiNet and which included only one doctor.

While the provision was only one piece of an expansive bill, Katz said removing it could undermine the SustiNet proposal’s goals.

“I personally don’t think it’s a financially sustainable deal the way they have it now,” said Katz, a Milford general surgeon. “It won’t serve to increase access to patients.”

To expand coverage to more people, Katz said there will need to be cost savings in the system, and removing the potential for savings from limiting defensive medicine will likely mean cutting costs in other areas, like the rates paid to providers. That could make it hard to get doctors to treat SustiNet patients.

“This piece has to be in there in order to be able to decrease defensive medicine costs and recycle that money so that more people can access that system,” Katz said.

Dr. Robert McLean, a New Haven internist and governor of the Connecticut Chapter of the American College of Physicians, said doctors with already busy practices might have doubts about taking on SustiNet patients, particularly since it’s not clear how well the plan will pay. The liability protection would have guaranteed that doctors would embrace it, he said.

“When you’re looking at trying to bring doctors and other providers into the mix of seeing this large pool of patients, I think a lot of people who may otherwise have a bad taste in their mouth from excessive regulation, from other government-run programs like Medicare, they need to have some carrots to bring them into some of those systems,” he said. “And it’s a big carrot to bring them into the system.”

McLean, who served on a committee involved in developing the SustiNet plan, said it’s not clear whether his organization will withdraw its support for the bill if the liability provision isn’t restored. He said SustiNet is a promising way to bring changes to the health care delivery system, such as the use of patient-centered “medical homes,” which emphasizes coordinating patient care.

“It would be a real shame if this doesn’t move forward in a more productive way,” he said.

SustiNet supporters said the loss of the liability provision shouldn’t undermine the plan’s ability to make other changes and improve the health care system.

State Healthcare Advocate Victoria Veltri, who co-chairs the SustiNet board, said everyone involved in crafting the proposal understands the malpractice liability concerns. But that provision isn’t as critical to the plan as other aspects, she said.

“It has so many positive things, I would hate to think that the deletion of that one provision would cause the providers to walk away completely from SustiNet,” said Veltri, who was not involved in the decision to remove the liability portion from the bill.

Ritter noted that SustiNet without the liability provision simply leaves the malpractice situation where it is today. If the liability provision became law through SustiNet, she wondered, would doctors treat patients in SustiNet differently?

“While I can understand they’re disappointed, I don’t mean to minimize that, I would hope that there’s an understanding of the difficulties there that were created,” she said.

She also noted that it’s difficult to quantify the extent to which liability issues drive up health care costs.

Estimates of the cost of defensive medicine vary widely. One study published last September estimated the annual cost of the medical liability system to be $55.6 billion, or 2.4 percent of health care spending. Other studies have suggested it has a larger impact.

Other cost drivers include use of high-cost care, people foregoing preventive care and ultimately needing more costly treatment, prescription drug costs and a lack of patient education that can result in some patients going to the doctor over minor concerns rather than trying to address them on their own, Veltri said.

“I won’t say that liability’s not an issue,” Veltri said. “It’s definitely an issue. But it’s not the primary driver of increasing health costs.”

Katz and McLean acknowledged that it can be difficult to pinpoint the extent to which defensive medicine exists. It can be hard to separate decisions driven by fear of being sued from pressure from patients’ expectation of receiving exhaustive testing to address a problem. But McLean said it needs to be addressed to improve the health care system.

“Defensive medicine is a huge part of the problem,” McLean said. “It may be hard to quantify, and that’s part of the problem. But it’s a big part. It is a way that doctors think.”

Sign up for CT Mirror's free daily news summary.

Free to Read. Not Free to Produce.

The Connecticut Mirror is a nonprofit newsroom. 90% of our revenue comes from people like you. If you value our reporting please consider making a donation. You'll enjoy reading CT Mirror even more knowing you helped make it happen.

YES, I'LL DONATE TODAY

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Arielle Levin Becker

SEE WHAT READERS SAID

RELATED STORIES
‘It’s a nightmare:’ A growing number of seniors are unable to book vaccine appointments as problems mount
by Dave Altimari and Jenna Carlesso

The state acknowledged Friday in an email to local health workers that some residents are waiting days for a callback.

Panel recommends small, inflationary pay hike for state officials
by Keith M. Phaneuf

Connecticut's part-time legislature hasn't received a pay hike since 2001. The annual base-pay for senators and representatives is $28,000.

Police task force seeks wider applicant pool for watchdog role
by Kelan Lyons

The task force sent four recommendations — and two that didn't get unanimous approval— to lawmakers for the 2021 session.

Miguel Cardona, who are you?
by Ann Policelli Cronin

When I ask Connecticut teachers about Miguel Cardona, those who know him or have worked with him say that he is really nice guy who knows what the challenges in our classrooms are, knows how to help teachers to improve their teaching, and respects public schools. All good. But what is his vision for teaching and learning that he will bring to the U.S. Department of Education?

Connecticut needs a strong two-party system, this Democrat says
by Edward Marcus

J.R. Romano’s recent resignation as the state’s Republican Party chair has brought into focus the need for a viable opposition party in Connecticut. It is not healthy politics when everything is totally controlled by one party:  the legislature, the governorship, and most of the major municipalities in our state.

Support Our Work

Show your love for great stories and outstanding journalism.

$
Select One
  • Monthly
  • Yearly
  • Once
Artpoint painter
CT ViewpointsCT Artpoints
Opinion Miguel Cardona, who are you?
by Ann Policelli Cronin

When I ask Connecticut teachers about Miguel Cardona, those who know him or have worked with him say that he is really nice guy who knows what the challenges in our classrooms are, knows how to help teachers to improve their teaching, and respects public schools. All good. But what is his vision for teaching and learning that he will bring to the U.S. Department of Education?

Opinion Connecticut needs a strong two-party system, this Democrat says
by Edward Marcus

J.R. Romano’s recent resignation as the state’s Republican Party chair has brought into focus the need for a viable opposition party in Connecticut. It is not healthy politics when everything is totally controlled by one party:  the legislature, the governorship, and most of the major municipalities in our state.

Opinion Connecticut’s $100 million college shell game
by Stephen Adair

The plan to consolidate the 12 community colleges in Connecticut into one college with 12 campuses is called “Students First,” which is ironic because it does not fund students first.  It funds a new administration in a new, statewide bureaucracy. The Board of Regents (BOR) and the Connecticut State Colleges and Universities (CSCU) system office […]

Opinion Inconsistent television captioning is a barrier to equal access
by Jeffrey Bravin and Barbara Cassin

Our world long ago entered the age of the 24-hour news cycle, and a full understanding of the “who, what, when, where and why” of the news is critical for deaf, deafblind and hard of hearing citizens. Yet, Connecticut’s inconsistent quality of television captioning locks our community out of the complete sense of what is happening.

Artwork Grand guidance
by Anne:Gogh

In a world of systemic oppression aimed towards those of darker skintones – representation matters. We are more than our equity elusive environments, more than numbers in a prison and much more than victims of societal dispositions. This piece depicts a melanated young man draped in a cape ascending high above multiple forms of oppression. […]

Artwork Shea
by Anthony Valentine

Shea is a story about race and social inequalities that plague America. It is a narrative that prompts the question, “Do you know what it’s like to wake up in new skin?”

Artwork The Declaration of Human Rights
by Andres Chaparro

Through my artwork I strive to create an example of ideas that reflect my desire to raise social consciousness, and cultural awareness. Jazz music is the catalyst to all my work, and plays a major influence in each piece of work.”

Artwork ‘A thing of beauty. Destroy it forever’
by Richard DiCarlo | Derby

During times like these it’s often fun to revisit something familiar and approach things with a different slant. I have been taking some Pop culture and Art masterpieces and applying the vintage 1960’s and 70’s classic figures (Fisher Price, little people) to the make an amusing pieces. Here is my homage to Fisher -Price, Yellow […]

Twitter Feed
A Twitter List by CTMirror

Engage

  • Reflections Tickets & Sponsorships
  • Events
  • Donate
  • Newsletter Sign-Up
  • Submit to Viewpoints
  • Submit to ArtPoints
  • Economic Indicator Dashboard
  • Speaking Engagements
  • Commenting Guidelines
  • Legal Notices
  • Contact Us

About

  • About CT Mirror
  • Announcements
  • Board
  • Staff
  • Sponsors and Funders
  • Donors
  • Friends of CT Mirror
  • History
  • Financial
  • Policies
  • Strategic Plan

Opportunity

  • Advertising and Sponsorship
  • Speaking Engagements
  • Use of Photography
  • Work for Us

Go Deeper

  • Steady Habits Podcast
  • Economic Indicator Dashboard
  • Five Things

The Connecticut News Project, Inc. 1049 Asylum Avenue, Hartford, CT 06105. Phone: 860-218-6380

© Copyright 2021, The Connecticut News Project. All Rights Reserved. Website by Web Publisher PRO