carol cox
Katrina Bouvier
As obstetricians and gynecologists, we provide quality health care to women from all walks of life in Colorado. We perform cancer screenings, monitor high-risk pregnancies, deliver babies, and more. But our ability to continue this life-giving and life-saving work is under attack by a series of ballot proposals that threaten to make care more expensive, less accessible, and less safe.
Initiatives 150 and 277, supported by trial lawyers seeking astronomical jury awards, would remove reasonable limits on the amount people can collect by suing health care providers. Patients who experience negligence or adverse outcomes should absolutely be fairly compensated, and that’s why. No limit The amount allowed as compensation for economic damages such as lost wages and chronic medical treatment.However, there should be a limit to the amount you can receive In addition to economic damage For intangible non-economic damages such as inconvenience, pain and suffering.
Stay informed: Sign up to receive Daily Opinion in your inbox Monday through Friday
According to COPIC, a Colorado-based medical liability insurance company, eliminating the cap on noneconomic damages would increase premiums for medical professionals and increase health care costs across the state by an estimated $155 million annually. It is said that it will become. In states that do not have non-economic damages limits, damages awarded to plaintiffs and their attorneys reach tens of millions, even hundreds of millions of dollars, which is higher than the national average, according to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. 50% to 200% higher.
The ripple effects of rising medical costs will be dire. Not only will patients face higher health insurance premiums and out-of-pocket costs, but they will also have greater difficulty finding health care providers, especially in low-income rural and urban areas. Both are already facing shortages of medical providers. Because physicians like us who treat patients with the most complex medical challenges already face a high risk of adverse outcomes and litigation. Rising costs and the fear of unlimited jury awards are forcing us and other obstetric, neurology, and surgical professionals to forgo high-risk surgeries, for example, or to charge even more for such services. The situation becomes even worse, as they may even withdraw from clinical practice altogether. The already serious problem of “medical deserts.”
Take Summit County, for example. One of us practices at a clinic where patients drive hours from places like Salida and Buena Vista to give birth because there is no obstetric provider or labor and delivery unit near their home. If these harmful proposals go forward, small rural clinics like this one won’t be able to afford to keep their doors open. If we exclude them, patients will have to travel further to receive treatment.
As a result, “birth deserts” will expand and get worse. maternal mortality rateThis rate is already higher in the United States than in other developed countries, disproportionately affecting women of color and women in rural areas. We entered obstetrics to protect women and babies from preventable tragedies, not to stand by as unmanaged health conditions claim lives.
We entered this field because we love spending time with patients. Rising insurance premiums will exacerbate an already difficult scenario of rising health care costs and reduced reimbursement for health care providers, forcing them to reduce the time they spend with each patient to recoup their financial losses. But this is something no healthcare provider wants to think about. Already, specialty wait times are increasing, which is believed to be due to rapidly growing populations and strained healthcare systems. Any further negative effects could be catastrophic.
Three other measures proposed by trial lawyers — Initiatives 274, 275, and 276 — would provide professional protections that would allow medical professionals to review cases in confidence to learn from each other to improve their patients. threatens the quality of health care in Colorado by significantly changing and, in some cases, eliminating it. Safety and quality of care. Taken together, these proposed measures would create a medical environment in which qualified physicians would not want to practice medicine in the state we love.
The bottom line is that doctors, medical professionals, and patient advocates, not lawyers with dollar signs in their eyes, should shape the laws governing medical practice in Colorado. That’s why we’re calling on the state Legislature and Governor Jared Polis to support Senate Bill 130, a reasonable alternative to these ballot measures. Senate Bill 130 would increase the cap on non-economic damages from $300,000 to $500,000 over five years. Colorado would join the majority of states that have caps on non-economic damages. This solution allows patients to equitably recover their losses after an adverse event, while protecting access to affordable, high-quality health care for all Coloradans.
Call on your legislators to oppose these harmful ballot measures and support Senate Bill 130 instead. https://protectpatientaccessco.org/take-action/
Dr. Carol Cox, FACOG, is an obstetrician and partner at Swan Mountain Women’s and Family Clinic in Summit County. Dr. Katrina Bouvier is an obstetrician and managing partner at Women’s Health Care Associates and vice president of the Colorado Chapter of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists.
