Kenneth
There are many facets to reducing cost-----the writer has one aspect right but not the other.
Decreasing preventable errors (let's call it what it is dead people) is a great idea-----but how to implement decreasing preventable errors. I do find it rather unbelievable that 98,000 preventable errors cost $29,000,000,000.00 dollars.
If no lawsuits were filed------ then why the high cost???? (For these preventable errors?)
That is almost $300,000.00 per each of the 98,000 preventable errors, 98,000 people dead due to 'preventable errors'. Did the cost occur before the death of the person, or did the cost occur after the death of the people?
If people don't sue then why the high cost-----what is in the cost this writer is giving?? How did the writer arrive at this cost?
Were there lawsuits involved that drove up the cost of these preventable errors? This doesn't make sense.
seattletimes.nwsource.com
"The true crisis in medical malpractice is negligent medical care. The Institute for Medicine estimates that more than 98,000 deaths a year are caused by preventable medical errors, making this our nation's sixth-leading cause of death. The cost to the system of these deaths alone is estimated at more than $29 billion dollars annually — twice the cost of the malpractice system as a whole."
Sure sounds to me like another Federal Regulatory department in the making-----an increase in government spending----.
Is this what the writer is advocating? How would she stop "preventable errors"? Doesn't the prevention belong in the doctors office, the hospital, the nursing home, the operating room?
How can the Federal Government be in all of those places simultaneously without a substantial increase in $ spent on an increased beauracracy????? And, why should the Federal govenment be in these places?
mj |
