-
About Rick Santorum
-
About Pennsylvania
-
Constituent Services
-
Issues & Legislation
-
Press Office
-
Upcoming Events
-
Youth & Student Corner
-
Contact Information
-
Keystone Connection
-
Employment Opportunities
|
Online Newsletter
Signup for our Email Newsletter!
|
|
Protecting Access, Protecting Patients
By Senator Rick Santorum (R-PA)
May 30, 2006
One would hope the principal reason an individual chooses to enter public service is to help solve the foremost problems facing our towns, our states, and our country. And while many of us may differ on how to best approach those problems, those differences should not stand in the way of finding a reasonable solution. Nor should they stand in the way of an open debate regarding the issues facing Americans today. When confronted with a problem, we, as elected officials, have a responsibility to meet it head on, not to skirt it and leave the American people to deal with the consequences.
Unfortunately, there is a major healthcare crisis that has been growing steadily over the last decade or so that, due to the power of special interest groups, we have been unable to address. I am referring to the medical liability crisis caused by frivolous lawsuits, skyrocketing insurance premiums, and the costly defensive medicine they induce. The effect these damaging forces have on Americans' ability to access the healthcare services they need cannot be ignored any longer.
Here in Pennsylvania we are feeling the cost of inaction as much as anywhere in America. Pennsylvania is one of the 21 states listed by the American Medical Association (AMA) as being in "medical liability crisis." Just recently, the Pennsylvania Medical Society, a non-partisan organization, released its 2005 "State of Medicine in Pennsylvania" report, in which it states that Pennsylvania's healthcare system "is stressed and access questionable."
We should not be facing these issues. Pennsylvania is home to some of the world's finest medical schools, and in 1994, 50.5 percent of Pennsylvania doctors-in-training stayed in the state after completing their residency. Our schools were a pipeline, generating young, talented physicians who wanted to stay in the Commonwealth and heal our families, friends, and neighbors. Just ten years later the number of medical students staying in Pennsylvania had decreased to a stunning 7.8 percent. No longer is Pennsylvania an attractive place for a young doctor to take a job, to start a practice, to establish roots. Instead, doctors are leaving our state in droves, and really, who can blame them? Pennsylvania has a per physician liability payment of more than three times the national average. This is simply devastating to our healthcare system, and unfortunately, the problem is getting worse. If current trends continue--and unless we do something, there is no reason to believe they won't--Pennsylvania will face a shortfall of nearly 10,000 doctors by the year 2010.
While this is affecting our ability to receive care in any number of specialties, it has been particularly harmful to women who require the expertise of an obstetrician/gynecologist. Pennsylvania's expecting mothers and newborn babies deserve to be cared for by those who are trained to understand their unique needs, and far too often in today's environment, they are unable to find an ob/gyn. I can't tell you how many times I have heard stories about women and expecting mothers facing difficulties accessing a doctor--in many cases being forced to drive hours for a critical appointment. Over the last eight years, nine central Philadelphia maternity wards have closed their doors, depriving the women of our Commonwealth's most populous city of 44,000 bed days every year.
The situation is out of hand, and the time to act is now. Earlier this month I introduced the Healthy Mothers and Healthy Babies Access to Care Act, a bill focused on ensuring that mothers and newborns have access to the obstetrical and gynecological services they need. Senator John Ensign (R-NV) introduced a similar bill that would attack this problem more broadly. Both bills would adopt the approach that has recently been successfully implemented in Texas. In 2003, Texas, via voter initiative, instituted a $750,000 stacked cap on non-economic damages. In no way does this law limit what a victim can recover in terms of medical bills, lost wages, or any other economic damages suffered. But it does prevent the exorbitant "pain and suffering" damages that drive up insurance premiums and compel doctors to practice costly defensive medicine. And it works. Since the implementation of this law, Texas has become the only state ever removed from the AMA's medical liability crisis list.
First and foremost, our healthcare laws must serve the interests of the patients. And until we do something to curb the influence of frivolous lawsuits on access to care, they won't. These bills need to be debated, fairly and openly, on the floor of the United States Senate. They deserve an up-or-down vote, and they need to be passed. We must make a choice--do we serve the patients and the doctors who wish to help them or do we serve the trial lawyers? And by preventing debate and an up-or-down vote on these bills a few weeks ago, the Senate Democrats made their choice abundantly clear.
##
|
|
