By Mike Shields
KHI News Service
TOPEKA, Mar. 1
Virtually every segment of the health-care industry threw support behind a bill heard Thursday by the House Judiciary Committee that would exempt health-care providers from the Kansas Consumer Protection Act.
But House Bill 2530, drew opposition from the Kansas Attorney General”s Office, AARP, lawyers who defend consumers, and emotional testimony from individuals who said passing the bill would leave defenseless those who are wrongfully billed or deceived by medical professionals.
The bill was requested by the Kansas Medical Society in reaction to a Feb. 9 Kansas Supreme Court decision in the case of
Williamson v. Amrani.
The court found that a Wichita doctor could be held liable for deceptive acts and practices under the Kansas Consumer Protection Act in the course of providing professional services. The court remanded the case to district court, so final outcome of the case is pending.
Opponents of the bill told committee members they believed the request for the bill was, among other things, an “overreaction.” to a case not fully played out. And attorney Mike Hodges of Lenexa told committee members that health care providers proved by supporting the bill that they “wanted to be the only people in the state who get an exception to honesty. All the Supreme Court said is that we get to go back to prove our case. Why are we here (considering legislation) four days after the decision came down.”
The committee also heard tearful testimony from Marion Bonura of Kansas City, Mo. who said her husband was dead because of deception and bad doctoring from a Kansas surgeon who performed a “duodenal switch” on her husband, an elective surgery the man chose after the doctor promised him the operation would allow him to “eat whatever he wanted and still lose weight.”
“I”m a simple person,” she said. “My husband was a simple person. We believed and see what we got. I”m beggingplease don”t make it any easier for them.”
But supporters, including everyone from nurses to veterinarians, optometrists, dentists, social workers and psychologists, said they feared the ruling would open new avenues for what otherwise would be handled as malpractice claims. And they said the industry is regulated enough already without need of the Kansas Consumer Protection Act.
Jerry Slaughter of the Kansas Medical Society and others also predicted the ruling, if not countered by the Legislature, would result in increased medical malpractice insurance premiums and new leverage for lawyers seeking settlements from doctors” insurers.
The committee is not expected to work the bill until sometime next week.
-Mike Shields is a staff writer for KHI News Service, which specializes in coverage of health issues facing Kansans. He can be reached at
mshields@khi.org
or at 785-233-5443, ext. 123.