October 2003
When settling a case might make sense
by Timothy Feuling
One of the most
important elements in any malpractice insurance policy is the "consent to
settle" clause. This provision gives the doctor the ultimate decision about
whether or not a malpractice case should go to court, or be settled out of
court. Without this clause, the insurance company makes the decision (with
or without the approval of the doctor) and often, that determination is made
based on what's best for the insurance company.
But, although it's
crucial that your policy should give you the right to say "I won't settle,"
there are times when you might want to consider that alternative.
To decide whether or
not to settle, talk with your insurance company representatives and
attorney. Be completely honest with them about the facts of the case, and
listen to their opinion. Critically and objectively evaluate the strength of
your case. Did you provide proper care for your patient? Did you act in
accordance with appropriate guidelines and within accepted professional
norms? If you did, you still have an even more important question to ask:
did you keep the kind of accurate and complete documentation needed to prove
it?
It may not be easy for
you to admit to yourself (or to your attorney and insurance company), but if
you didn't act in accordance with the standards of your peer group, maintain
proper and complete records, or make sure your actions were congruent with
your stated practice purpose, you might be better off settling the case.
This would include
situations, for instance, where your practice forms included medical
terminology that went beyond your state's scope of practice, or you provided
non‑chiropractic medical advice to your patients.
Keep in mind that
motivation doesn't count here. You might have had good intentions, might
have genuinely had your patient's best interests at heart. But if the care
you provided or the advice you gave cannot be supported by the Council on
Chiropractic Practice Guidelines, or other widely accepted guidelines, you
will have little to bring to court in your defense.
Even if you provided
proper treatment, you'll need to prove it in court. That means having
complete and accurate records of all contacts with the patient, a signed
Terms of Acceptance form, a Report of Findings, and other documentation that
will show you explained the purpose of your care to your patient and
fulfilled all your legal and moral obligations. You'll need to be able to
show evidence that your care was supported by professional standards and
you'll need the fortitude and time to go through the actual process of a
court trial.
Should you come to the
conclusion that you weren't in the wrong, you still need to weigh the
negative effect of a settlement against the physical, emotional and economic
ramifications of enduring, and possibly losing, a lawsuit.
In 1999, Dr. Charles E.
Kerr, M.D., a Michigan M.D. with a family practice, wrote an article for
Medical Economics titled, "Why I settled a malpractice suit I thought I
could win." He described the psychological turmoil the lawsuit caused him.
"Being sued was very emotional for me. My job is a major portion of who and
what I am, and this threat to my career filled me with anxiety. That made it
difficult to concentrate on my practice, and I became irritable and
intolerant with my office staff. I also became concerned about 'limiting my
exposure' when treating seriously ill patients, and I started ordering more
consultations to protect myself."
The stress, and the
trial schedule, took its inevitable toll when the case went to court. "As
the trial went into its third week and threatened to drag on for several
more, I was finding it very difficult to keep up my solo practice. I tried
to cram all my office appointments into one full day and two partial days
each week."
During the first few
weeks of the trial, it became apparent that the case wasn't going his way,
even though he remained convinced that he had not committed malpractice. "We
felt that the judge's rulings on several crucial motions had shown a bias
for the plaintiffs. We also feared that most of the key points in my favor
were too complex for the jury to understand. If we didn't cooperate with the
judge's efforts for a settlement, our prospects in court might worsen."
Meanwhile, he
explained, he lost $30,000 in practice income and his family and office
staff members were pressuring him to settle so his practice, and his life,
could return to normal. Finally, he did settle and began the task of putting
the unpleasantness behind him.
The question then
becomes, will victory in court be won at too great a price?
When answering that
question, you'll have more than just the economics to consider. Most
doctors, for example, fear the loss of their reputation if the lawsuit is
reported to the National Practitioner Data Bank. While that is a legitimate
concern, a listing in the data bank might have far less impact on your
practice than a protracted trial. As Evelyn W. Bradford, a malpractice
attorney in Waynesboro,
Pa., once told a client: "A scorned patient
has a much better chance of hurting your livelihood than a single report in
the data bank."
In an article in
Medical Economics, she added this bit of sound advice: "Don't prolong the
agony by refusing to settle when the deck is clearly stacked against you."
("Just got hit with a malpractice threat? Cool it," by Evelyn W. Bradford.
Medical Economics, May 11, 1998.)
Obviously, there are no
clear "ground rules" for deciding when to fight a lawsuit and when to
settle. Each case ‑ and each doctor ‑ is unique and the decision must be
made only after looking at all the factors involved.
(Timothy J. Feuling
is president of Chiropractic Benefit Services (CBS) and vice president of
the World Chiropractic Alliance.
He assists doctors in maximizing their practices through the proper choice
of insurance and related services. Doctors may contact him with questions,
comments, and requests for insurance quotes at
2950 N. Dobson Rd. Ste. 1,
Chandler,
AZ
85224, by phone at 800‑883‑0412 or by
e‑mail: feuling@cbsmalpractice.com).