Letters

I was outraged to see the opinions of Miles Zaremski, J.D. (” ‘Pain and Suffering’ Damage Caps,” Law & Medicine, Feb. 1, p. 8). His views on noneconomic damage caps are false, and contrary to the best interests of all practicing physicians. He poses as a friend to doctors because his professional background is in “representing health care providers.” But the fact is that both defense and plaintiff attorneys benefit economically in an environment of hyperactive medical malpractice litigation. He also misleadingly states that “caps in some states have not had an effect in lowering [medical malpractice] premiums.” The fact is that caps absolutely do hold down the rate of increase of premiums. Consider our situation here in California, where we have had a strong legislated cap on noneconomic malpractice damages for many years (the MICRA law). As a result, our medical malpractice premiums are quite reasonable, which is remarkable in view of the fact that Californians are notoriously litigious. Lawyers oppose the capping of noneconomic malpractice damages for only one reason: It reduces their incomes. You can dismiss their spurious “constitutional” arguments.