When Dr. Peter Winters (In response to Ray McEachern, Association For Responsible Medicine) points to successful heart transplants etc. in Indiana he is demonstrating medical practice which is quite different from medical malpractice.  With medical practice the doctor "First, does no harm…"

Medical malpractice is when a patient is injured or killed by something his/her doctor did or didn't do. This injury can be simply mechanical and have little impact on the patient and their family.

More often the injury is more than mechanical and affects every aspect of the victim's life. This happens when the patient and their family is seriously injured, is quite vocal about the malpractice and the doctor feels pressure to cover it up.

That patient is usually denied subsequent medical treatment while the doctors scramble to cover the negligent/criminal butt. During this cover-up phase precious time that the victim needs to minimize damages is lost. More often than not the victim is then painted as crazy or lying, and medical records may be combed, altered and falsified.

It is difficult for the victim to get an attorney because laws have been passed which make it difficult for the attorney to cover expenses much less make a living representing med mal victims. If that victim can get an attorney they get the opportunity to go before a biased panel of the doctors peers.

Regarding second opinions, Podell M.D., and Proctor in WHEN YOUR DOCTOR DOESN'T KNOW BEST say, "Would you criticize a friend or colleague who probably plays tennis with you, knows your spouse, belongs to the same club, and is referring business to you? Of course you wouldn't and neither will that doctor." They go on to advise the patient to go out of state. If doctors won't contradict each other over a second opinion why do we think they will contradict each other when the stakes are supposed to be higher?

The peer review panel, more than 80% of the time, reinforces the initial doctors diagnosis of crazy, malingering and gold digging by saying there was no malpractice. The original doctor may then sue the victim for payment and usually wins!

If the peer review panel does find the physician guilty of malpractice there are still no consequences for the negligent/criminal doctor or those who helped him cover-up. His malpractice insurer pays the first 100,000 dollars and the rest comes from the Victim's Compensation Fund.  He is not likely to be disciplined and the Health Professions Bureau does not report these findings.

In fact there is a local OB/GYN with 21 complaints and 6 findings of malpractice. If a consumer calls the Health Professions Licensing Bureau they are told that he has been practicing in Indiana for some 20 years and has never been disciplined. This is only one example. So what incentive do these repeat offenders have?

With what may be the lowest form of accountability in the nation coupled with one of the lowest malpractice insurance rates in the country, as Ray McEachern pointed out, Indiana is truly not a safe place to receive healthcare.  Indiana looks quite attractive to doctors who would otherwise be high risk to malpractice insurers. Indiana looks quite attractive to doctors who fear accountability because there truly is none.

Laws that actually protect patients/consumers do decrease injury. In A Measure of Malpractice, which is the Harvard study cited by Winters and McEachern, page 134 confirms this. Leape actually goes on to say that we should not hold doctors accountable because they will just cover-up their mistakes.

Just as our children are molded by the accountability we provide so are our doctors.  Not only do we reprimand parents who provide no structure or discipline but they are now being legally held accountable for what their delinquent children are doing. Like teenagers, many doctors are doing excellent work. Like teenagers, many doctors are pushing all limits and flaunting it and Indiana is providing no structure or discipline.

Ray McEachern was clearly not talking about medical practice - for which doctors are handsomely and justifiably rewarded both monetarily and in status. He was referring to the estimated 52,000 Hoosiers that have not had a good outcome due to their doctors negligence.

For every malpractice victim there are husbands, wives, sons and daughters.  For every victim there are at least 10 secondary victims.  So many people have been swept under Indiana's rug that it's bulging badly. The numbers are getting too large to hide and Indiana should hang its head in shame.