Medical Malpractice News

Strike Three for CJD on Medical Malpractice

Latest Study Adds to List of Unsupportable Conclusions on Medical Malpractice

Rockville, MD – February 28, 2006 – In what appears to be just another in a long line of poorly conceived studies, the Center for Justice and Democracy (CJD) and Americans for Insurance Reform (AIR) have struck out once again.

The CJD/AIR study released Monday, authored by CJD Executive Director Joanne Doroshow and CJD Advisory Board Member J. Robert Hunter, apparently used a Council of Insurance Agents and Brokers (CIAB) survey to arrive at a predetermined conclusion.  The authors assert that insurance premiums have not continued to rise and, therefore, declare the insurance crisis over.  The CIAB, their primary data source, labeled the CJD/AIR report as "sloppy math" and "total incompetence."

The truth is, the underlying reasons for the medical liability crisis are still present: unpredictable courts, rising defense and claims costs, and excessive cases with no merit.

"I invite these groups to tell a Miami OB/GYN facing $300,000 annual insurance premiums that the crisis is over," said Lawrence Smarr, president of the Physician Insurers Association of America.

This CJD/AIR report, "Insurance 'Crisis' Officially Over - Medical Malpractice Rates Have Been Stable For A Year," brings to light a disturbing trends in similar studies manufactured by CJD and affiliated consumer groups: unjustifiable methodology and misleading conclusions.

In July 2005, plaintiff attorney Jay Angoff authored a study for CJD and was roundly criticized by industry regulators, the actuarial profession, members of academia, and even the Joint Economic Committee of Congress.  While some gently rebuked Angoff, others explicitly characterized his work as incomplete, actuarially unsound, and misleading.

Prior to that, CJD was fond of accusing medical malpractice insurers of raising premiums to make up for stock market losses.  After those with knowledge of the medical liability insurance industry repeatedly pointed out that most malpractice insurers are invested primarily in bonds, CJD changed its shrill tune to denounce all investment income.  They continue to do so, despite the fact that the Government Accountability Office performed a study in October 2003 that determined rising claim costs were the primary driver of malpractice premiums, and current reductions in investment income were not sufficient enough to account for the dramatic increase in premiums.

CJD does a disservice to true consumer advocates by perpetuating false and misleading information in its efforts to protect plaintiff attorneys' interests and the inefficient medical liability litigation system.

Please contact us if anyone you know has suffered from debilitating injuries due to medical malpractice in Minneapolis.

	Did You Know?
	Drug-switching practices happen and are very dangerous Another public-spirited drug giant, Merck, was forced to pay a settlement of $1.9 million to 17 states in 1995 for drug-switching practices involving its Medco subsidiary. Medco pharmacists, who had given excessively favorable treatment to Merck products, were thereafter required to reveal their Merck connection to their customers.