PENNSYLVANIA MALPRACTICE Administration looks to refute argument over caps

Officials plan to show the details of payouts in lawsuits.
HARRISBURG, Pa. (AP) -- As the administration of Gov. Ed Rendell searches for $220 million that it promised to help doctors pay their malpractice insurance premiums, it also wants to know whether limiting jury awards for patients' pain and suffering would solve the underlying problem.
At Rendell's request, Chief Justice Ralph J. Cappy has ordered the Administrative Office of the Courts to create a system for collecting information about payouts in successful malpractice lawsuits in Pennsylvania's courts.
It will probably take some time to bear results. If and when the system comes on line, it will collect information on future claims, not past.
Rendell's administration hopes to show what part of the payouts are the cost of medical care for the plaintiff, and what part is for the pain and suffering awards levied by juries.
"It could be very telling," said Rosemarie Greco, Rendell's director of the state Office of Health Care Reform.
Trying to change system
In a highly charged debate that has pitted doctors against lawyers, and in many cases, Republicans against Democrats, the courts and the Legislature have tried to change the system to lessen the exposure of doctors and hospitals to lawsuits and claims.
Doctors and insurers continue to push to cap pain and suffering awards at $250,000, arguing that caps would stabilize volatile insurance premiums, keep doctors from fleeing the state and attract larger commercial insurers to Pennsylvania.
Rendell, a lawyer, has insisted that no case has been made that pain and suffering awards are the cause of doctors' rising insurance premiums, and opposes caps because he says it would be unfair to patients injured by medical mistakes.
So far, no one -- not the insurance companies, not the doctors, not Rendell -- has been able to show how much pain and suffering awards, or "noneconomic damages," play into insurance company losses and, in turn, rising insurance costs.
The cost of caring for the plaintiff -- the "economic damages" that include lost wages, health care and extras such as a personal aide -- are rising steeply too, as new health-care techniques and medicines are introduced and more people use them.
Sidestepping questions
Sam Marshall, president of the Insurance Federation of Pennsylvania, sidestepped questions about why the insurance industry does not seem to share Rendell's zeal for crunching the numbers on malpractice payouts.
Such an analysis misses the point of reforming the malpractice claims system, Marshall said.
Caps, which 19 other states have, could give an assurance of stability and predictability that would help insurers predict losses while lowering insurance rates, he said.
"The whole point on pain and suffering is that it is an inherently subjective determination," Marshall said.
"If you can't put a value on pain and suffering, or you can't project it, then you can't expect there to be stable, accurately priced insurance."
With the Legislature poised to take up more malpractice insurance reforms this fall, more and better information is needed to do it correctly, said J.P. Kurish, a spokesman for Senate Democratic leader Robert J. Mellow.
If insurance companies had a breakdown of payouts that supported the argument for caps, Kurish said, "we'd already have it by now."