41 ms·

>In my view there should be a nationwide malpractice insurance pool and the medical associations should push for better quality standards within their ranks. I

>In my view there should be a nationwide malpractice insurance pool and the medical associations should push for better quality standards within their ranks. It's an interesting idea, but who pays for it? Taxpayers? Have fun with that politically. The doctors? You'll drive out those on the margins of "doctor or other career". We here in Canada already have a massive doctor shortage everywhere but major cities, so that's a problem.

shimon 10y ago
I agree this would be politically problematic, but not for the reason you provide. Doctors already spend tons of money on private malpractice insurance; this national pool would just be a different administration of the same insurance payments. In fact, the pool could be effected with different regulation of the existing private insurers and changes to malpractice law. And if done right, it could plausibly lower overall insurance fee burden on doctors.
- Scoundreller 10y ago
  > Doctors already spend tons of money on private malpractice insurance In Ontario Canada, the government reimburses most of their malpractice insurance fees. As a result, they're currently paying 1986 rates: http://www.health.gov.on.ca/en/pro/programs/ohip/mlp/announcements.aspx http://www.health.gov.on.ca/en/pro/programs/ohip/mlp/announc...
  - forgetsusername 10y ago
    And how is Ontario doing, generally, with regards to the number of doctors: patients? I lived there, and know doctors personally. The answer is terrible.
794CD01 10y ago
In the US, at least, "doctor shortages" are caused by insufficient capacity upstream. Some combination of not enough medical schools and not enough licenses issued. Which happens because existing doctors are not incentivized to flood their field with more doctors who will then compete with them and lower prices.
viraptor 10y ago
> The doctors? You'll drive out those on the margins of "doctor or other career". Would that really happen? I know in Australia doctors pay for their own indemnification cover. (http://www.doctorconnect.gov.au/internet/otd/publishing.nsf/Content/medicalIndemnityCover http://www.doctorconnect.gov.au/internet/otd/publishing.nsf/...)
- forgetsusername 10y ago
  >Would that really happen? Why would it not? At the margins you make decisions based on a variety of factors. If X costs more than Y, you choose Y. I don't know if, practically, that means 1 potential doctor or 1000 decides not to go to med school. But in a world where we are already short doctors, even the former is "too many".
  - viraptor 10y ago
    Because nobody knows X, Y, and other values before they start. It's years of training. Budgets change, rules change, people move to other regions, ... When you're trying to decide what to do before you start studies, realistically you can't predict your finances and earnings in 10 years. There are some trends you can look at, but that's just one component. Even then it makes more sense in private sector than one funded in very creative and politically dependent ways.

shimon 10y ago

I agree this would be politically problematic, but not for the reason you provide. Doctors already spend tons of money on private malpractice insurance; this national pool would just be a different administration of the same insurance payments. In fact, the pool could be effected with different regulation of the existing private insurers and changes to malpractice law. And if done right, it could plausibly lower overall insurance fee burden on doctors.

Scoundreller 10y ago
> Doctors already spend tons of money on private malpractice insurance In Ontario Canada, the government reimburses most of their malpractice insurance fees. As a result, they're currently paying 1986 rates: http://www.health.gov.on.ca/en/pro/programs/ohip/mlp/announcements.aspx http://www.health.gov.on.ca/en/pro/programs/ohip/mlp/announc...
- forgetsusername 10y ago
  And how is Ontario doing, generally, with regards to the number of doctors: patients? I lived there, and know doctors personally. The answer is terrible.

794CD01 10y ago

In the US, at least, "doctor shortages" are caused by insufficient capacity upstream. Some combination of not enough medical schools and not enough licenses issued. Which happens because existing doctors are not incentivized to flood their field with more doctors who will then compete with them and lower prices.

viraptor 10y ago

> The doctors? You'll drive out those on the margins of "doctor or other career". Would that really happen? I know in Australia doctors pay for their own indemnification cover. (http://www.doctorconnect.gov.au/internet/otd/publishing.nsf/Content/medicalIndemnityCover http://www.doctorconnect.gov.au/internet/otd/publishing.nsf/...)

forgetsusername 10y ago
>Would that really happen? Why would it not? At the margins you make decisions based on a variety of factors. If X costs more than Y, you choose Y. I don't know if, practically, that means 1 potential doctor or 1000 decides not to go to med school. But in a world where we are already short doctors, even the former is "too many".
- viraptor 10y ago
  Because nobody knows X, Y, and other values before they start. It's years of training. Budgets change, rules change, people move to other regions, ... When you're trying to decide what to do before you start studies, realistically you can't predict your finances and earnings in 10 years. There are some trends you can look at, but that's just one component. Even then it makes more sense in private sector than one funded in very creative and politically dependent ways.