Resident: Malpractice litigation isn’t the problem

In Mr. Andrew Albatys’ article on health care, he did an excellent job addressing current problems to the health care crisis. No one likes changes.

At the same time, from the private citizen to the business community, our health care system is seen to be broken. Private citizens and the business community are finding they continually have to change plans to keep competitive and affordable.

The only error I noticed in Albatys’ article was litigation. First, the illustration of litigation and cost of malpractice, and health care. Sure, this country litigates at a higher rate than other countries. That’s the great equalizer in this country.

A better name would be “consumer protection.” Consumer protection by litigation keeps the average citizen on equal par with the corporations who may not be as observant about product safety or medical procedures as they should be. The peanut butter company who purposely put out bad products is an example lately.

We must remember, we no longer live in an age where the doctor is one of the few in the community who are educated. The doctor is no longer seen as the person who is to be put on a pedestal an worshiped in the community. We are one of the most educated countries in the world. The doctors is now one among many, not the unique person in the community.

Litigation also does not equal higher malpractice costs. About 30 years ago, Indiana passed a law on caps on malpractice awards. At the time, there had never been a malpractice suit won.

With the caps, malpractice insurance continued to rise. About five years ago, OB/GYNs raised Cain about outrageous malpractice premiums, and left the state. Luckily, most were replaced.

Personally, I know no person that has even sued for malpractice. I do know plenty of people that have sued for divorce. When you mention litigation being high in this country, that’s dead on, because more than 50 percent of marriages end in suits for divorce.

The only time insurance companies raise the flag of litigation for health care costs is when the stock market is down, or the housing market is down. The insurance companies have cried wolf one too many times. It is time for change.

— Steven Fetter, Jeffersonville



Reader says House was wrong on health care

The House of Representatives failed miserably in its responsibility to read the health care legislation before voting “yes.” Members cannot possibly really know or understand what they have passed, but I will be responsible for all 2,000 pages of it. I am extremely angry that, because of their irresponsibility, I may soon be forced to pay for and submit to a monstrous scheme I do not want.

Please be clear about this — legislation like this is based on force. I am threatened with violence by policemen, bureaucrats and tax collectors if I refuse to pay for or comply with their grand designs for re-engineering my life.

This complex piece of legislation will entangle my health care in ever-expanding nets of government control, pave the way for a complete government takeover of my health care, bankrupt many businesses, foster unemployment and increase my taxes, either directly or indirectly, despite promises that this would not happen.

I am further angered that they could have taken simple steps to improve health care that would not have involved 2,000 pages of unread legislation loaded with special interest deals and corporate welfare. They could have allowed Americans to buy health insurance regulated by the state of their choice, and expanded the contribution limits for Health Savings Accounts to balance the tax treatment of self-purchased health insurance with that provided through employers.

These two simple steps would have solved many of the problems with our current health care system — problems that were mostly caused by government policies in the first place. Instead of taking this simple, peaceful approach, they have decided to vote for complexity and coercion.

Just a reminder that the 10th Amendment to the Constitution prohibits Congress from passing this kind of legislation, but they did it anyway. They have violated their oath of office. If they really worked for me, instead of for special interests and the Congressional leadership, I would fire them immediately for gross incompetence. As it is, I must wish them the worst of luck in the 2010 election.

Am I being too harsh?

Please remember, they’re the ones using the threat of force against me to control my money and my health care. I am merely protesting their love of coercion.

They can still redeem themselves by voting “no” when this scheme comes back to them for a final vote. We will be watching and keeping track of their actions.

— Donnie Brison, Jeffersonville



Aebersold asks Obama to quit

Editor’s Note: Due to an editing error, we are republishing the following letter.

Here’s what needs to be done here in the U.S. President Obama makes a statement that on November 19th, The Great American Smoke-out date, he is going to quit smoking and he says; “America, please join me in quitting one of the most disgusting addictions the world has ever known. Let’s all quit together and spend our money and time helping ourselves to become better citizens of the world. With addiction, we lose our ability to freely make choices. I long for my former freedom and I’m sure you do too.

November 19th is the date. Let’s regain our original freedom from tobacco.

Please join me in quitting smoking.

Sincerely, President Obama.”

— Jamey Aebersold, New Albany



Reader find Hill’s statements misleading

The CMMS report also warns that the bill’s forced cuts in Medicare spending would result in drastically reduced fees paid to hospitals and doctors, and that in turn could result in some Medicare providers refusing to serve Medicare patients.

Rep. Hill is doing a disservice to his constituents by making such misleading statements.

— Todd Young, Bloomington