Georgia Insurers Raise Malpractice Premiums Following Tort Reform
In a recent article which appears in the Macon Telegraph News at least seven Georgia Insurance Companies selling medical malpractice insurance to physicians have raised their premiums in the 16 months following the passage of medical malpractice caps in Georgia. This hike was made despite promises from lobbyists for the insurance industry that a cap would decrease malpractice premiums during their push for the malpractice legislation, Senate Bill 3, which passed in March of last year. In July of last year, Dennis Kelly, of the American Insurance Association, admitted in an interview with the Chicago Tribune that "We have not promised price reductions with tort reform." In fact, a March 2002, media release from the AIA states " insurers never promised that tort reform would achieve specific premiums savings..."
According to the Macon Telegraph, MAG Mutual, Georgia's largest malpractice insurer, increased physician premiums by 53.5 percent from 2000-2004 while projecting a 33.1 percent decline in future payments to claimants and plaintiffs. The surplus that MAG Mutual holds is almost three times of that required by the National Association of Insurance Commissioners.
Since February 2005, seven insurance companies requested rate hikes. For instance, First Professional Insurance Company requested a whopping 63.8 percent rate increase and received approval for a 35 percent increase. Medical Assurance Company requested an even higher 64.10 percent increase and received approval for a 35 percent increase. The Medical Protective Company requested two separate rate hikes, one of 24 percent in June 2005, only 4 months following passage of the cap legislation, and another 28.8 percent increase two months later in August 2005. Medical Mutual Insurance Company of North Carolina requested a 43.8 percent increase and received approval for a 13.8 percent increase in January 2006.
Senate Bill 3, the tort reform law heavily lobbied by the insurance industry, severely restricts a person's right to hold any corporation, hospital or doctor accountable for dangerous errors and misconduct for fatalities. Notwithstanding the hype and political agendas of those insurers seeking passage of this legislation, the real proof is the utter failure of this law to achieve the stated purpose of lowering physician premiums. This can only lead one to believe that lawsuits and payouts to claimaints really have nothing to do with insurance premiums.
Never before have I been treated so disrespectfully by my insurance carrier. They have been pretty respectable and some there are probably still people I respect very much. But the past few months they have reared their ugly head. Lies, greed and manipulation like any other insurance company only they have no bones about being disrespectful to physicains. At least the health insurance companies will be respectful when you speak to them..not these guys. I heard of these kind of companies but thought ours was different. They were always helpful, seemed really empathetic to doctors, and brag about being run by doctors so they are supposedly empathetic to our needs. I learned alot from them over the past few years.
For example, they have a manual that if you follow can help to protect your office from liablity. There is alot in there that helped me to manage my practice effectively. Our office new that manuel. We really liked the documentation of phone calls they recommended in regards to patient phone calls. We took it to heart and docuented all phone calls. We document who calls, the time, where they are calling from and the subject matter of the phone call. I make it a habit to do this with my business calls as well and then document precisely what the caller said and repeat it back so that we are on the same page. We have documented each and every call, saved each and every e-mail from our liability carrier just like they taught us. It is so apparent now that they are unable to keep their story straight. They should really read this book of theirs. It is amazing how no 2 people in thier company know what their office polices are as our office conversations reflect distinctly different policies depending on who you speak with their. That is a no no according to their copy.
They have blessed be with an almost 40% rate hike to see indigent patients that would have totaled perhaps 9 or 10 at most only because my former employer cancelled my policy without the option to renew. This, I was told previously on multiple occasions simply could not be done without my permission. But now all of a sudden it is okay because I was his employee. It was not okay 3 months ago. It was not okay a few years ago. I have been employed before and no one ever cancelled my policy without the option for renewal, especially with an enormous rate hike. I work locums now so my insurance is paid through another company but I wanted to take care of my indigent patients and a few patients that I have had a long term complicated history with. Some of my indigent patients have complex health issues, limited access to care and resources thus I desired to keep my coverage. It took 6 weeks of e-mails and phone calls to finally get a quote and what I received was my office umbrella policy and a 40% rate hike with a 10,000 deductable. This because I filled out a form precisely how they told me to and reflected that some indigent disabled people would be seen at home despite their inablity to pay. Doctors have seen patients at home before havent they. Isn't that how we started? Ohh...high risk...who new. I was simply trying to take care of these people who have limited or no access to care or finances. We would have even gone into our pockets to supply the medications. Every doctor you know see's somebody that they don't get reimbursed for. Sometimes the reward is simply that the patient trust you and you see lives changed. Plus, as the provider we could get other services into the homes that were so obviously needed that would benefit the patient and keep them out of the hospital. Is this not the goal of most states? I thought we were trying to keep people well and out of the hospital. Besides that this was the truly rewarding part of being a physician, but you can't do it without your malpractice coverage. So my 8 or 10 patients that I was going to continue to see was going to cost me a 40 percent rate hike and 10,000 deductable.
Then one of the employees at the company (just like the run around you get at the health insurance companies) said that my application states I am only doing home care and the physicians on the board made a decision that this was high risk medicine. Has anyone seen those statistics? I have done continuing education in this area and have had this in my scope of practice since day one and this is the first I am aware of that. What makes this high risk? Well, okay I guess if they thinik it is high risk but I never new anything about that. Then they said I did not have an office to practice in yet they sent me my umbrella policy and workmens comp policy for my office without hesitation. When I pointed that out they came back with the fact that that was cancelled because it expired for non-payment. They sent it one or two days before the first payment was do and they were going to cancel it right then on the phone. No one could find my e-mails asking to re-instate my coverage, records of my multiple phone calls, etc..but they were happy to hang their hat on an application about high risk (oohhh) home care to 8 or 10 indigent patients that caused my malpractice to skyrocket. These are the people I trust for my liability issues. They would not have lasted 1 day in my office. That type of inconsitency would absolutely not fly. the inconsitencies in their day to day statements were giving me a headache. I simply could not afford their little rate hike and it really did make me sad. I just need my tail coverage...but here it is 4 days after they promised I would have it and still don't have it. This is really sad as I have spent alot fo the last 2 years getting involed with the legal system and though about getting serious with expert witness and defense work in malpractice cases. But in the end, it isn't the plaintiff's attorneys that caused me to close my doors and my med mal carrier just helped me close the door on my last patient. Saddened in Georgia
Very good reading. Peace until next time.
WaltDe