Welcome New York Post readers

I’ve got a piece in today’s New York Post on why doctors and medical providers should be interested in New Hampshire’s first-in-the-nation “early offers” experiment in malpractice reform. Earlier here, etc. Note also that Christopher Robinette at TortsProf has added to his illuminating series of posts on the idea with new contributions here and here (& Allen McDuffee, Washington Post “Think Tank”.)


  • Your column twice urges readers to see if the new law “works.” How would you define that, and how would you measure it?

  • A few decades ago, health insurance reformers said that operations were done for the income benefit to the surgeons. A second opinion program was set up in Rochester. To the surprise of the Blue Cross people, operations increased. The second opinion confirmed to the patient that an operation was necessary. So I am a bit concerned about the second opinion aspect to litigation in New Hampshire as I understand Mr. Olson’s essay.

    Patients should be charged for adverse outcome insurance to match costs to patients with benefits to patients in a rational way. Letting a jury set the payout level after the fact is just plain foolish.