Kevin, MD recently linked to this article accusing the Mississippi malpractice industy of being racist.
The article is from the "San Francisco Bay View, National Black Newspaper." "The Jackson Advocate News Service contributed to this story. " This article is the product of 2 African-American newspapers (nothing wrong with that)- but not exactly mainstream media.
-
The article details the plight of Dr. Ronald Myers, a Black physician.
His medical malpractice insurance company, though obligated to cover all physicians in the state, is canceling his insurance despite his never having had a claim filed against him.
Mississippi’s controversial new tort reform legislation gave the company sole discretion as to which doctors it will insure.
These 2 sentences don't make sense. How can an insurance company both be "obligated to cover all physicians in the state" and have "sole discretion as to which doctors it will insure."
-
Contending he is a victim of “medical malpractice lynching,” he filed suit Dec. 8 against the company, but it may be too late to keep the clinics open.
-
This article is short on facts- the malpractice insurance company is not named even once. I wouldn't put too much faith in this article. I am hoping that the mainstream media will pick up the story and give an unbiased version.
-
In my opinion, the reason Dr. Myers had his insurance cancelled is because he lives in a judicial hell-hole. In some parts of Mississippi, you can sue for side effects of a drug without even taking the drug.
-
Opposing viewpoints are welcome.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
man... why can't I read any medlogs without curious jd showing up to put his two cents in for maintaining the status quo? caps are only part of the solution, but a necessary one since they are only for NONECONOMIC damages such as pain and suffering... you can still get your multimillion dollar lawsuits on. But then again you probably support the rationale behind the recent Steven Johnson Syndrome/Children's Advil Lottery game. Your are entitled to your opinions.. have fun stalking!
To Curious JD:
I probably should have given the post a different title, I wasn't trying to get into the malpractice debate. My main point was that the doctor in the article was not a victim of racism. As a university asst prof, I am only indirectly affected by the malpractice situation in MS (there are special caps for univ faculty and my malpractice insurance is payed for by the dept of psychiatry at the univ of MS). I just wanted to defend my adopted state against the charge of racism.
and i'm sorry for engaging in the debate! point taken. i finally updated some links on my site and got around to reciprocating... keep up the great blog!
Well, I do not actually imagine it may work.
here
Post a Comment