Study confirms reasonable liability limits protect patients, providers
A new peer-reviewed study in Health Economics adds to the growing body of evidence that dismantling reasonable limits on non-economic damages can destabilize medical liability systems and drive up health care costs.
According to the analysis led by researchers from RAND, Brown University, and Harvard Medical School, states that repealed these safeguards saw steep increases in medical liability premiums, particularly among high-risk physician specialties.
The authors examined court decisions in Georgia and Illinois that struck down long-standing protections. After those rulings, premiums rose by roughly 20 to 23 percent for obstetrics and gynecology and general surgery. As the study notes, “States considering the repeal of their caps may need to understand the potential ramifications of their policy actions for malpractice insurance premiums and subsequent consequences for physician practice and patient health care.”
These findings underscore how removing reasonable limits on non-economic damages has a domino effect across the health care system – shaping physician behavior, increasing defensive medicine, and ultimately threatening patient access to timely, affordable care.
In a press release HCLA Chair Mike Stinson said the study “Validates what physicians and patients alike have long known: reasonable limits on non-economic damages help maintain stability in the medical liability system, keeping coverage affordable and ensuring patients can find the care they need, when they need it.”
The HCLA welcomed the focus and visibility given to the link between health care costs and liability reforms, showing that the consequences for patients are real.
Click here to read the full report and learn more about how reasonable limits on non-economic damages support a patient-centered medical liability system.
Relentless pursuit of jackpot justice in Florida
Florida lawmakers are once again advancing a sweeping change to the state’s medical liability system – pursuing jackpot justice that experts warn would increase medical lawsuit abuse.
According to the Miami Herald, the Florida House is fast-tracking a bill identical to the one Gov. Ron DeSantis vetoed earlier this year due to a lack of “safeguards.” They are moving forward with consideration of the legislation despite concerns about skyrocketing insurance premiums and mounting legal payouts.
The proposal would dramatically expand who can seek non-economic damages in medical liability cases, allowing adult children to get unlimited damages for the death of a parent, and for parents to get unlimited damages for the death of an adult child – a concept that personal injury attorneys across the state have been seeking for years. Health care leaders warn the real outcome will be more aggressive litigation that drives physicians out of the practice of medicine and pushes patient costs even higher.
The effort is opposed by the Florida Medical Association, Associated Industries of Florida and the Florida Hospital Association. In recent weeks, they highlighted the already-high costs of liability insurance in the state, and multi-million-dollar payouts that would reach new extremes.
Yet lawmakers sponsoring the new bill say they intend to move forward without any reasonable limits on the amount of non-economic damages that could be claimed.
Advocates of affordable care across the state must remain vigilant in opposing these aggressive tactics to undermine medical liability protections across the state. If enacted, Florida patients will ultimately pay the price through reduced access to care, higher costs, and an even more strained health-care workforce.
Liability limits reduce defensive overuse of imaging
Evidence that medical liability reforms can reduce unnecessary tests in emergency departments is growing, reducing costs for patients without sacrificing quality of care.
According to researchers from the Neiman Health Policy Institute, patients in states with liability reform were up to 32% less likely to undergo low-value scans for common conditions such as headaches.
Physicians have long explained that the threat of lawsuits fuels the practice of “defensive medicine,” especially in emergency room settings, where ordering extra imaging can feel like the right choice to protect providers against the threat of meritless lawsuits, even when it offers little to no additional clinical value.
The new analysis examined more than 630,000 emergency room headache complaints from 2019, through Medicaid data, and found that states with liability reform laws experienced a 21% decrease in imaging use. This is a direct sign that reducing the threat of lawsuits changes practice patterns.
“Our findings reveal that tort reform in a state was associated with less use of advanced imaging for the common ED presentation of headache,” said study co-author John Jordan, MD. He noted that understanding how liability policy shapes clinical decision-making “is essential for informing policy that supports physicians’ appropriate clinical decisions and optimizes resource use.”
By lowering the fear of meritless lawsuits, liability reforms help physicians focus on evidence-based care instead of legal risk. That means fewer unnecessary scans, lower costs for patients, and a more efficient health care system.
Click here to read analysis of the study and explore how medical liability reforms reduce defensive medicine and improve patient value.