Malpractice Legislation Remains Stuck in the Senate
Republicans say their measure could help reduce unnecessary lawsuits and higher malpractice premiums that make it harder for doctors to practice. They tried last year and again earlier this year to force votes on similar measures.
“The crisis faced by obstetricians, gynecologists and emergency and trauma care professionals illustrates the urgent need for national medical liability reforms,” the White House said in a statement.
Democrats accuse Republicans of playing up to their donors in the medical and insurance lobbies and say that limiting damages is unfair to injured patients and their families.
The match
I have received a few important comments about the match. The wife of an incoming intern wrote:
I wouldn’t say most students would ask for the match. They probably keep quiet because they don’t want to be branded a troublemaker and jeopardize a career they’ve worked so hard to make possible.
My husband just went through match 3/02 for a competitive specialty and we cursed every moment of it. Since then, it’s become increasingly clear that residents often give a lot more than they get and that residency, as it exists now, works primarily to the hospital’s benefit. Just a few of my complaints:
First, please read very carefully Save the Match. Second, imagine the world without a match. Who would suffer?
I proposed this question to some residents while supervising in clinic a couple of days ago. To paraphrase one, “obviously the critics have not participated in a non-match fellowship search”. She shared with me her initial concerns about the match as a 4th year student. However, having just finished the interviews and acceptance of a non-match fellowship, she lamented the lack of a match in her fellowship!
The match uses the game theory which John Nash (he of a Beautiful Mind) developed. The current algorithm helps students get the highest choice which has an opening for them. It is student biased rather than hospital biased (go to the web site for links to the studies).
The match does not drive wages, or working conditions. Medicare reimbursement drives wages. ACGME and residency review committees drive working conditions.
Working conditions have improved dramatically since I graduated in 1975. I see excellent progress regularly.
I could develop a thought experiment in which working conditions might worsen at some highly desirable residencies! However, the working conditions depend more on regulatory bodies, and how the students “vote” during their match. Programs which treat their residents better tend to have better matches.
The anarchy of life without a match would (according to the web site) disadvantage couples (over 500 couples matched last year) and minorities. This protest and lawsuit are (in my opinion) poorly considered. Few would benefit from the unintended but predictable consequences of the lawsuit’s success
