Doctor Proposes Not Treating Malpractice Lawyers, Families

A lot of doctors are concerned about rising insurance premiums and they would like to see limits on the amounts that can be awarded in malpractice lawsuits, despite the fact that there is little if any proven connection between average award amounts and rising premiums. As a consequence, some doctors would like to refuse to treat malpractice lawyers and politicians who agree with them.

Tara Burghart reports on a South Carolina surgeon, Dr. J. Chris Hawk, who proposed at the annual meeting of the AMA that the group endorse the denial of all but emergency care to attorneys involved in medical malpractice cases:

Neurologist Michael Williams said although he understood Hawk's frustration, the resolution never should have been introduced because it seeks to discriminate against a group of people. The resolution left the AMA "a really big mess to clean up," Williams said.

Last week, the daughter of a Mississippi legislator said she was denied treatment by a plastic surgeon because her father opposes limits in damage suits against doctors. Dr. Michael Kanosky said he referred Kimberly Banks to other plastic surgeons to have her burn scars removed because he had lobbied on the other side of the issue and saw an ethical conflict.

What a positively evil position to adopt — and I really doubt that Kanosky should be allowed to retain his medical license. What’s next, conservative doctors refusing to treat liberal activists and liberal doctors refusing to treat conservative politicians? Will anti-war doctors refuse to treat people who favor intervention in Iraq? There’s no ethical conflict involved in treating a patient who is related to a politician who has a political disagreement with you. There is, however, an ethical conflict between the claim that you are a physician and a healer and then refusing to treat a person because you don’t like their relatives.

If Hawk’s proposal had actually been adopted, even patients with valid complaints might have trouble being heard in court because (at least in some places) lawyers might not want to get involved out of fear that they and their families might be denied medical care. Threatening not to treat even the children of lawyers who get involved in malpractice suits is nothing short of extortion. “Hey, nice kids you have there. It would be a shame if anything happened to them and there were no doctors around to help, know what I mean?”

Read More:

• Guide to Ethics and Morality
• News About Ethics
• Bioethics