I'm sorry Dr., but you are conflating the issues, neither of which can blame the legal profession. There are two issues raised here. First is the PRICE of medical services, second is the overall COST of services. The former is the real problem, not the latter, because the latter is in actuality dependent on the former. Allow me to explain.
The PRICE of a medical procedure, or prescription drug, or checkup is the real vice here. This prevents people from obtaining necessary and affordable care. This is in no way significantly affected by the legal profession (as you yourself conceded in your previous post). This is solely due to R&D costs, market factors, and unfortunately most of all greed. There is no reason a trip to the ER to get bandaged should cost a $1000 dollars. Quite frankly, there is no reason an MRI should costs thousands of dollars. The company's making these machines sell them to hospitals for anywhere from $250,000-$1,000,000. The markup is astronomical. The hospital in turn marks up the cost of the procedures, again usually exhorbitant. There is a reason MRI's and other procedures in this country are more expensive then other 1st world countries, the price is higher!
Why an MRI costs $1,080 in America and $280 in France
"There is a simple reason health care in the United States costs more than it does anywhere else: The prices are higher."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...-mri-costs-1080-in-america-and-280-in-france/
Now to the next issue. The overall COST of medical services. This issue can give a little more credence to your example of Dr's practicing defensive medicine because they are afraid of being sued. But quite frankly, when you look at the facts, this is a hollow argument. Let me explain for the layman, which I'm sure (hope) you are already aware.
Whenever a Dr. requests a study, such as a CAT scan, MRI, etc., he doesn't automatically get it. It must be pre-approved by the patient's insurance provider. The requested study is applied to the clinical guidelines to make sure that A) the study is necessary, and B) the proper workup has been done prior to its request. For example, if a patient comes in with back pain and you request a procedure for him, absent any acute injury, the insurance company will require a proper workup, i.e. a physical exam, xray, a trial of physical therapy, etc. before a study is approved. Thus, when Dr.'s order frivolous studies (either for fear of being sued or because they are just lousy Dr.'s), or prematurely order studies, they often get denied. In fact, the vast majority of requested studies get denied. This does NOT increase the cost of medical care, because those unnecessary studies are not approved by the insurance company, who has a financial interest in only approving what is medically necessary, and thus they are never performed. Thus the high overall COST of medical services is not due to the legal profession, again it is due to the aggregate PRICE of the medical services themselves.
Dr.'s don't mind. They have covered their behinds by ordering all the study's they can think of, and the insurance company is the one who has denied it. (Typically third party review companies made up of independent physicians conduct the review, because the ordering physician wants everything he asks for, and insurance company typically wants to deny everything).
So again, you really are perpetuating myth here. The real culprit of why medical services cost so much is the PRICE. When everyone with their hand in the pot expect to make a profit (hospitals, bigpharma, medical device manufacturers etc.), and when Dr.'s, surgeons in particular, are commanding a high 6 figure salary, there is no wonder the price will reflect that.
I have no problem with capitalism, but at least be aware of the real culprit, and stop using attorneys as your scapegoat.
Btw, with a med mal premium of $13k, you are obviously in a high risk field. You are either an ER Dr, a surgeon, oby/gyn, or something of the sort (which typically fall between $12k-$20k). Your premium is more then twice what a general practioners would be.
