Chicago Medical Malpractice Lawyer Blog

As a medical malpractice lawyer, I am very disheartened by the following story, which illustrates the major affect that health insurance has on health outcomes and the health care system in general.

Madison part reports for CNN, “a freelance cameraman's appendix ruptured and by the time he was admitted to surgery, it was too late. A self-employed mother of two is found dead in bed from undiagnosed heart disease. A 26-year-old aspiring fashion designer collapsed in her bathroom after feeling unusually fatigued for days. What all three of these people have in common is that they experienced symptoms, but didn't seek care because they were uninsured and they worried about the hospital expense... All three died” (9/18).

Research released last week in the American Journal of Public Health estimated that 45,000 deaths per year in the United States are associated with the lack of health insurance, and have a 40 percent higher risk of death than those with private health insurance. The estimate came from careful examination of government health surveys from more than 9,000 people between the ages of 17 and 94.

Hurley, McKenna & Mertz settles many medical malpractice cases each year. The following situation is upsetting, in my opinion, because Chicago area ophthalmologist, Dr. Nicholas Caro, is still practicing despite upwards of 50 medical malpractice suits and a year-old recommendation from the Illinois chief medical prosecutor that the Lasik surgeon have his license revoked (Chicago Tribune, Shelton 7/6). Depositions and documents complied for the cases against Dr. Caro consistently describe patients “repeatedly seeking treatment for painful or worrisome side effects” post Lasik surgery. Medical records show that some patients returned to Dr. Caro more than a dozen times after surgery. Several patients ended up with corneas damaged beyond repair, others were forced to consider cornea transplants if they wanted to see as well as they could prior to the botched surgery.

The formal complaint alleges that Caro mishandled Lasik surgeries and “failed to properly manage treatment of post-operative complications.” Yet, no disciplinary action has been taken and Caro continues to operate on people's eyes, highlighting ongoing concerns that the Illinois Department of Financial and Professional Regulation is not aggressive enough in pursuing bad doctors.

Although Dr. Caro blames the situation on an overly litigious society, according to the Ophthalmic Mutual Insurance Company, which insures about 30 percent of U.S. ophthalmologists, “about 75 percent of the specialists who practice at least 25 years have three or fewer lawsuits or malpractice claims in their career.” The Chicago Tribune further “checked the records of more than a dozen other ophthalmologists in the Chicago area and found that none had been sued for malpractice more than 12 times; most had far fewer lawsuits.” Therefore, it is my opinion that Dr. Caro is far above what can be considered an average number of malpractice complaints. As a medical malpractice lawyer, I am disappointed with the Department of Financial and Professional Regulation’s sluggish response to complaints against Dr. Caro. In my opinion, patients are subjected to undue risks each additional day Dr. Caro is permitted to practice.

A blog on the New York Times (6/6) website discusses the different points of view on the medical malpractice “crisis”. Jeremy Peters wrote, "For years…health care lobbyists have argued that the exceedingly high cost of medical malpractice insurance was a result of a runaway legal system that allowed juries to award huge judgments to victims of doctors' mistakes."

However, "a new report from an independent government watchdog group suggests that those claims are exaggerated." The study by the New York Public Interest Research Group found that "the amount of money paid for malpractice claims in New York has actually fallen in recent years, and that the number of overall claims has remained remarkably stable.” Tom Baker wrote in his book, The Medical Malpractice Myth (U. Chicago Press), that a “California study, as confirmed by more recent, better publicized studies” verifies “that the real problem is too much medical malpractice, not too much litigation.” He found that “most people do not sue, which means that victims—not doctors, hospitals, or liability insurance companies—bear the lion’s share of the costs of medical malpractice.”

Many public complaints about the medical malpractice “crisis” have been greatly exaggerated. Doctors who have not exercised due care with their patients should be liable for injuries their negligence caused. As a medical malpractice lawyer, I provide a service to those who have been injured by the negligence of medical care providers.