Federal tort reform
ISSUE SUMMARY
It is well documented that the current medical professional liability system in this country has costly and adverse consequences for the health care system. The costs of defensive medicine and high professional liability insurance premiums combine to drive overall health care costs higher. Additionally, the costs of liability coverage and threat of lawsuit affect access to care by discouraging physicians from locating in certain areas, including rural and underserved areas of the country. Sensible, balanced tort reforms such as limits on non-economic damages awards have proven to be effective in stabilizing the professional liability environment in many states.
Traditionally, laws relating to personal injury litigation and the civil justice system have been left to the states to enact and regulate. However, many states have either been unable to enact effective reforms because of the political environment, or had their reforms struck down by the judiciary. That disparity in liability reforms has prompted numerous medical and business groups to urge Congress to enact reforms at the federal level. Although no effective liability reform is currently pending in Congress, the House of Representatives has previously passed reforms which included limits on non-economic damages, comparative fault changes, limits on personal injury lawyer contingency fees, and requirements for structured settlements.
While virtually all of organized medicine supports efforts to enact liability reform at the federal level, there is concern that federal reforms could pre-empt or weaken state-based reforms.
ADOPTED ACTION OR POLICY
The Kansas Medical Society supports medical liability reform at the federal level that is effective, and which does not pre-empt or jeopardize the tort reforms which are in place in states such as Kansas.
Adopted by the KMS House of Delegates on May 1, 2010.
