Hacker News Reader

Providers are liable for malpractice if they approve un-needed treatments, and all drugs have side effects.

And they meanwhile have their own liability insurance to pay, as well as medical student debt. So not going to be profitable either. Unless they start prescribing Carnival Cruise therapy or stiff like that.

View on HN

> Providers are liable for malpractice if they approve un-needed treatments

There is a lot of grey area between necessary to the point of malpractice if not provided and unnecessary to the point of malpractice.

Like, you’re not going to win a malpractice case because your doctor prescribed too many non-invasive tests and MRIs. And if my insurer is forced to approve every MRI, I'm probably going to ask my doctor for an MRI.

It is simply naive to think that the threat of malpractice discipline by state medical boards would deter bad actors from delivering wasteful or unnecessary care. The fee-for-service financial system heavily incentivizes over treatment. If you don't believe me then read "The Price We Pay" by Dr. Marty Makary. It documents many such incidents for which the providers were never punished.

https://www.bloomsbury.com/us/price-we-pay-9781635575910/

Reply on news.ycombinator.com