Refusal to seal
malpractice suit praised
Allowing medical settlements to be filed
in secret puts public at risk, says a patients rights
advocate.
By TERRIE MORGAN-BESECKER tmorgan@leader.net
“The
fact is you can find out more about a used car you are going
to buy than a surgeon who is going to operate on your
heart.”
Paul
Lyon Spokesman for The Committee For Justice For All
WILKES-BARRE – Patient rights
advocates are lauding a Luzerne County judge’s recent refusal
to seal a medical malpractice settlement and urging jurists
statewide to take the same stance.
Judge Mark Ciavarella’s
decision in the case of Walter Bryk bucked the standard practice
within the legal community of allowing settlements of lawsuits
to be filed in secret.
In medical cases, the practice
puts the public at risk by shielding sub-par physicians from
public disclosure of their mistakes, said Paul Lyon, spokesman
for The Committee For Justice For All, a non-profit group that
advocates for plaintiffs’ rights in civil litigation.
“The fact is you can find out
more about a used car you are going to buy than a surgeon who is
going to operate on your heart,” Lyon said. “Secrecy
agreements keep information about potentially dangerous
practices and procedures from the public and put people in
harm’s way.”
Ciavarella’s ruling mirrors
the stance taken by Lackawanna County Judge Terrance Nealon in a
2004 case. Nealon refused to seal a settlement the family of
Lucille Korczakowski, who died of ovarian cancer after a cyst
went undetected for three years, reached with her physician,
Jung Jang Hwan of Clarks Green.
In his ruling, Nealon said the
settlement could not be kept secret because part of the money
came from the state Medical Care Availability and Reduction of
Error Fund, a taxpayer-subsidized fund that pays part of medical
malpractice awards and settlements against physicians and other
health-care providers.
The fund was established in
2002 in response to the medical profession’s claims that
lawsuits were driving insurance costs so high that many
physicians were being forced to leave the state. Pennsylvania
physicians are required to carry $1 million in liability
insurance. The first $500,000 of that is covered by a private
insurer, for which the physician pays a premium. The second
$500,000 is covered by the M-Care fund.
The fund is financed through a
surcharge applied to physicians, with certain high-risk
specialties being exempt from the charge. It also receives
public money through a tax on cigarettes and a surcharge on
motor vehicle violations. In fiscal year 2005 the fund received
$271.8 million from those two sources, according to the
Pennsylvania Insurance Department.
The M-Care fund will pay part
of the $3 million Walter Bryk’s wife, Amanda, will receive in
her settlement with Mercy Hospital of Scranton and Dr. Jeffrey
Wilcox, a heart surgeon who failed to properly suture her
42-year-old husband’s heart, causing a rupture that killed
him, according to settlement papers filed in Luzerne County
Court last week.
In refusing to seal the Bryk
settlement, Ciavarella echoed Nealon’s sentiment that
allegations of medical malpractice are a matter of great public
concern, and settlements in such cases should be open to the
public.
Unfortunately, Lyon said, there
are too few judges who are willing to take that position.
“Judge Ciavarella should be
applauded. For too long the medical community has been allowed
to hide the epidemic of medical errors by insisting on
confidentiality agreements,” Lyon said.
Whether there is an
“epidemic” of medical errors has been a hotly contested
matter of debate.
Attorneys and physicians cite
studies that paint vastly different pictures regarding the
number of meritorious versus frivolous malpractice suits.
Chuck Moran, a spokesman for
the Pennsylvania Medical Society, said the society has not taken
a position regarding publicizing settlement amounts.
Art McNulty, acting chief
counsel for the Pennsylvania Insurance Department, which
oversees the M-Care fund, said the department supports
confidentiality agreements. The department believes such
agreements play an important role in protecting both patients
– some of whom don’t want personal details of their lives
revealed for all to see – and physicians – some of whom do
not believe they were negligent, but opt to settle cases for
legal reasons.
“The public may not know the
ultimate reason behind why a case settled but will most likely
assign the motivating factor to the medicine,” McNulty said.
“Were this to happen, a good doctor or health-care provider
could have his reputation ruined where this may not be the real
reason behind why a particular case was settled.”
That argument has grown stale
for Kingston attorney Joseph Quinn, a veteran malpractice
attorney who has been an outspoken critic of the medical
profession’s claims that the courts are clogged by meritless
malpractice suits.
“They want to couch it in
terms of how unfair it is to physicians. Let’s talk about how
unfair it is for a wife to lose her husband at age 42 and for
children to lose their fathers,” Quinn said.
Quinn represented Amanda Bryk.
Even though Ciavarella refused to seal her settlement, neither
he nor Bryk could comment on her case due to a confidentiality
agreement that the M-Care fund required them to sign.
“They (the medical
profession) continue to say these cases don’t have merit. If
we are going to talk about that and debate it, people should
know there are a lot of cases that have merit,” Quinn said.
“Let’s get the facts out.”
The M-Care fund paid out a
total of $232.6 million in claims in calendar year 2005, but the
fund does not identify the physicians or plaintiffs involved in
any of its cases. Such information is confidential by law,
McNulty said. The Legislature specifically made M-Care fund
records exempt from the state Right to Know Act.
Clifford Rieders, a
Williamsport attorney who sits on an advisory committee to the
M-Care fund, said he hopes someday a member of the public or
media will challenge that aspect of the law. For now, it’s up
to individual judges. He said he can only hope they will do
“the right thing.”
“I’d like to see every
judge in the state say, ‘I’m not going to sign off on
confidentiality and secrecy,’ ” he said. “We have to
take it out of the hands of the providers and have a good public
policy emanate from the courts.”
Terrie
Morgan-Besecker, a Times Leader staff writer, may be reached
at 829-7179.
|