There is currently a bill in the Pennsylvania legislature that would make apologies by physicians inadmissible in medical malpractice cases. It is designed to shield medical providers from liability when they know that malpractice has been committed.
As more states create
bills that protect physicians and health care providers from lawsuits
based on information attained during an admissions of errors, medical
institutions and health systems are putting together programs for
disclosure following an adverse medical event. These programs
specify procedures for doctors to follow when they perform mandatory
disclosure of the events that preceded a medical error. The current
Pennsylvania law mandates that patients and their family members
receive written admissions of adverse medical events (explanation of
the bill here.).
However, the proposed legislation would make it easier for these
facilities and institutions to express compassion after something
goes wrong, while protecting them from lawsuits that result from
information disclosed during this process.
The Pennsylvania
House of Representatives passed HB 495 on Mar. 2, 2011 by a vote of
171-27. The Senate Judiciary Committee is now considering the bill,
but some senators have stalled it and expressed concern about it.
The bill is supposed to allow health care providers and patients a
full and open conversation after an unforeseen outcome without fear
that anything said by the provider would be used against him in a
medical liability lawsuit.
Proponents of the
bill suggest that since victims of medical malpractice still have the
legal right to file a personal injury suit, regardless of the
physician apology exception. Moreover they argue the bill places no
limitation on the amount that can be recovered, and as such would
only promote a more open discussion between the patient and medical
provider.
However, the rules
of evidence generally allow for admissions of anything leading to
culpability to be admitted as evidence at trial. This bill is really
not an issue of open discussion. Rather it is about creating an
unnecessary exception to the Pennsylvania Rules of Evidence for
physicians and medical institutions.
Why should a
statement made by physician, admitting an error to a patient or
family member, to be exempted from the rules of evidence? Why should
the physician be shielded?
In a recent case, a lawsuit was filed
and reported on by the Philadelphia Inquirer that would have had a
different outcome if this bill passes. Ricardo Blake and Erica
Allen-Blake, lost their six day old baby daughter Destinee LoToya
Blake after a medical error occurred at Abington Memorial Hospital.
Physicians and hospital staff explained the error and apologized
during a state mandated disclosure meeting. A year later, the couple
filed a lawsuit. Their attorneys were able to use the admissions of
the medical providers received by the family at the meeting with the
physicians and hospital staff as evidence in the case. They won
their malpractice case.
The bill in the Pennsylvania
legislature would make apologies inadmissible in medical malpractice
cases, and protect the disclosure of what happened to cause the
malpractice event.
Sue McCrossin is a freelance writer
working with Mr. Stuart A. Carpey, a personal
injury attorney Philadelphia to inform residents in Pennsylvania
about the types of medical malpractice attorneys in Philadelphia can
help victims with. To know more about personal
injury lawyers Philadelphia
visit our website.
| Additional articles about personal injury lawyer Philadelphia |
|
|
| About the author |
Sue McCrossin is a freelance writer working with Mr. Stuart A. Carpey, a personal injury attorney Philadelphia to inform residents in Pennsylvania about the types of medical malpractice attorneys in Philadelphia can help victims with. To know more about personal injury lawyers Philadelphia visit our website. |
| Please Rate This Article |
Number of ratings: 0
Rating: 0