House Limits Malpractice Awards

The House voted Thursday to limit jury awards in malpractice suits, responding to complaints from physicians about their skyrocketing insurance premiums.

"Our nation is facing a health care crisis driven by uncontrolled litigation," said House Judiciary Committee Chairman F. James Sensenbrenner, R-Wis., prior to the 229-196 vote passing the bill. "Doctors are being forced to abandon patients and practices. Women are being particularly hard hit as are low-income and rural neighborhoods."

The bill would cap "non-economic" damages, such as those for pain and suffering, at $250,000. Democrats said the limits are unfair to the thousands of victims of medical errors and their families, and predicted it would do nothing to curb insurance costs.

"If this bill were current law, no experienced trial lawyer would take the case of Jesica Santillan, the Mexican girl who died after receiving the wrong organs at Duke University Hospital," said Rep. Alcee Hastings, D-Fla. "The case would be complex and expensive to put on, there would be no economic damages, and the maximum non-economic award would be $250,000."

The 17-year-old died at Duke University Medical Center in North Carolina last month after receiving a heart-lung transplant from a donor with the wrong blood type. Hastings said economic damages in the case would be precluded because she had no job history.

President Bush in his State of the Union address in January called for the federal limits on what juries can award.

"Consistent standards for liability reform will prevent excessive awards that drive up health care costs, encourage frivolous lawsuits and promote time-consuming legal proceedings," the White House said in a statement this week supporting it.

Still unclear is how the bill would fare in the Senate, where lawmakers of both parties have expressed concern about caps on awards.

The legislation would set a limit of $250,000 on non-economic damages — compensation for life-altering injuries like the loss of sight or limbs or the death of a child.

There would be no cap on economic damages — out-of-pocket costs like lost wages, medical costs or funeral expenses. Punitive damages — those that punish a physician for serious mistakes — would be limited to twice the amount of economic damages awarded or $250,000, whichever is greater.

Patients' ability to file lawsuits over old cases would be limited, as would attorney's fees. The bill would affect not just doctors but hospitals, nursing homes and other health providers as well.

Aware of the anti-victim charges from Democrats, Republicans a day earlier pushed through the House a measure that would create a voluntary system for tracking medical errors but protect the information from being used by lawyers in malpractice suits. It passed 418-6, but many Democrats said the lack of enforcement provisions meant it would do little.

In recent months, doctors in such states as Pennsylvania and New Jersey have rallied for malpractice reform, saying frivolous lawsuits have made their insurance rates unaffordable. Some doctors have temporarily walked out in protest.

Opponents of the bill have responded with television ads featuring victims of medical malpractice. The lawyer for Santillan's family also visited Capitol Hill to urge lawmakers not to pass the bill.