Insurance costs may force doctor to leave

Published 5:00 pm Saturday, February 21, 2004

When Benjamin Hu came to Whidbey Island 12 years ago to open his urology practice, he paid $900 annually in malpractice insurance.

Over the years, that amount skyrocketed. He spent more than $20,000 in malpractice insurance this year, which is a whopping 89 percent increase over last year.

The rising insurance rates leaves him questioning how much longer he can stay in business — in this state, at least.

“I’ve invested the last 12 years of my life here. I don’t want to be forced out if my malpractice insurance keeps doubling every year,” Hu said in a Tuesday interview.

He wants relief and is looking to the state Legislature for help.

One bill that Hu hopes will provide relief is the Comprehensive Liability Reform Bill that puts a $350,000 cap on pain and suffering awards in lawsuits while not affecting compensation for medical care or lost income.

That is one of a number of liability reform bills now under consideration in the legislature. Hu hopes some solution will be found to put a lid on medical liability insurance premiums.

He isn’t the only one seriously concerned about the issue. Whidbey General Hospital is also seeing increasing insurance rates.

The hospital paid $240,000 for insurance three years ago. Last year, the hospital paid nearly $600,000 for insurance. Scott Rhine, hospital CEO, said the administration is budgeting a 20 percent increase for insurance premiums this year.

Such increases come at a time when the hospital has dealt with financial problems that led to two rounds of layoffs in the past 14 months.

As for Hu, he has trouble absorbing increasing insurance rates because of his reliance on Medicare.

Nearly 60 percent of his patients are on Medicare and his reimbursements don’t take into account rising insurance costs. His reimbursements from Medicare have also fallen in recent years.

Hu pointed out that this situation could make it difficult for the hospital to find a new urologist if his practice goes under.

“They’re going to have a heck of a time to find a replacement,” Hu said. He’s afraid he may have to set up practice in a state that limits liability awards. California is one such state.

Rhine said that he’s not aware of any doctor who has left the island because of insurance concerns. However, he pointed out that an OB/GYN practice in Skagit County recently closed, citing high insurance premiums as the reason.

Whether doctors will benefit from the bills before the current legislature remains to be seen.

The bill providing a cap on pain and suffering awards passed the State Senate last week, however, the bill presently is holed up in the House Judiciary Committee.

The Senate is controlled by Republicans, who generally support the measure, while the House is controlled by Democrats, who generally don’t support it.

Some groups are opposed to such legislation, arguing that it simply won’t be effective in lowering insurance premiums.

Sue Evans, spokesperson for the Washington State Trial Lawyers Association, said there are no guarantees that insurance companies would lower premiums if the cap is approved.

She said that the bill also provides a series of provisions that don’t benefit the public.

“It’s really a trojan horse bill that decimates the rights of ordinary citizens,” Evans said.

The organization argues that the bill will provide protections for corporations manufacturing defective products, negligent government agencies and immunity for hospitals covering up for bad doctors, according to a written statement from the Washington State Trial Lawyers Association.

Although that bill remains in the House Judiciary Committee, a series of 17 less sweeping tort-reform bills passed the House on Monday and heads to the Senate.

Among the provisions of those bills are support for patient safety programs, limiting the costs of lawsuits and expert testimony, increasing the penalty for frivolous lawsuits and establishing an arbitration process before a suit goes to trial.

Despite the partial approval, several local lawmakers question the bills’ effectiveness.

“Our tort system is an enormous weight around the neck of our state’s economy,” said Rep. Barry Sehlin, R-Oak Harbor, in a written statement. “It affects health care, the cost of housing and the availability of nursing home care. . . . The proposals we adopted today are fairly harmless.”

Fellow Representative Barbara Bailey, also an Oak Harbor Republican, echoed Sehlin’s concerns.

“It doesn’t fix or address the underlying issues,” Bailey said, adding that the bills passed Monday don’t address medical malpractice reform.

She pointed out that House passed four additional study bills to examine tort reform. “We don’t need more study bills, we need action,” she said.

While the legislature sorts out tort reform, local health-care professionals hope an answer will be found, and quickly.

“All I’m asking is to not go out of business,” Hu said.