Lawsuits are Not Always Over When the Verdict Comes In
Clinician stress is well-documented. Even before the pandemic brought the double whammy of reduced staffing levels and increased patient care burdens, the ever-growing demands from electronic medical records, patient satisfaction surveys, and health insurance pre-authorizations contributed to burnout. However, one stress factor that isn’t usually considered is litigation. During a lawsuit, clinicians are likely to feel isolated, in large part because they are discouraged from discussing their case with their peers. When combined with remorse and self-doubt, as well as immersion in new and unfamiliar legal terrain, clinicians may experience sleepless nights and an inability to focus. Relationships can become...
Review of Bohn v. Providence Health Services Lawsuit
The Alaska Supreme Court recently interpreted a portion of the Alaska Healthcare Decision Act under Bohn v. Providence Health Services – Washington. While this is the first time the Court has interpreted the HCDA, its decision focused on a single provision of the statute, AS 13.52.080(a)(3). This provision grants immunity to health care providers declining to comply with a person’s health care decision so long as the provider “acts in good faith and in accordance with generally accepted health care standards” and so long as the refusal to comply is “based on a good faith belief that the person then...
[caption id="attachment_1586" align="alignleft" width="835"] Source: ACCMA Bulletin "Coping with Litigation Stress"[/caption] When faced with the harsh reality of a malpractice lawsuit, many physicians experience anxiety, anger, fear, depression, and other typical reactions which are collectively referred to as “litigation stress syndrome.” A medical malpractice lawsuit may take several years to resolve, and during that time these symptoms take their toll on the physician and their family. Fortunately, MIEC and its partners offer several services to help physicians successfully cope with the trauma of being sued. Litigation Stress Committee of the Alameda-Contra Costa Medical Association The Litigation Stress Committee of the Alameda-Contra...
New Alaska Supreme Court Ruling Regarding Ex Parte
New ruling in Alaska restricts disclosure of patient information related to litigation. For decades, Alaska has allowed informal methods of “discovery” (sharing of information) during litigation, including private discussions between defense attorneys and the plaintiff’s treating physicians. These “ex parte” communications were encouraged by the Alaska Supreme Court, as they facilitated early evaluation and settlement of cases, with a resulting decrease in litigation costs. However, a new ruling by the Court on June 22, 2018, determined that a cultural shift in views on medical privacy warranted overruling this practice. In Harrold-Jones vs. Drury, et al., the Court held that “absent...
Originally Published February 2012 in The Exchange - Issue 1 "An attorney subpoenaed my deposition testimony in a medical malpractice case. I’m not a named defendant and don’t believe it’s a big deal. Do I need representation? What’s my liability risk?" MIEC recommends against a physician testifying in a medical malpractice case without personal representation. Depositions are adversarial and the primary objective is to gain information regarding the care provided. Plaintiffs’ attorneys, as well as the attorneys of other physician defendants, are not your friends during this process and they will not protect an unrepresented physician’s interests. Their obligation is...