Comments on: An unconvential malpractice solution

By: Mark G.

Mark G. — Thu, 09 Oct 2008 01:24:39 +0000

I am a patient of Dr. Falkoff and have been for 14 years. I now live 25 miles away from his office and continue to see him. Why? Precisely because of his dedication to his patients and their health. I have brought two additional family members into his care.

Dr. Alan Falkoff is a great example of what most of America is missing – a dedicated family practice physician who puts quality care above all.

And – to T. Robinson, who appears to only be taking a cheap shot – Dr. Falkoff is very up on the latest medical research and has consistently shown a high skill level in the 14 years that I have trusted him with my family’s medical care.

Mark G.

By: T. Robinson

T. Robinson — Tue, 16 Sep 2008 03:09:46 +0000

â€œThere is a risk of a lawsuit with every patient I see, so I donâ€™t see why patients shouldnâ€™t share a small amount of that burden,â€ Falkoff said. Yes, and there’s a risk doctors might well earn that lawsuit every time patients walk into their offices, so why shouldn’t doctors bear some small part of that burden by, uh, oh, I dunno, caring about and following up with their patients, staying abreast of the latest research, improving their skills, and indeed, bringing back the art and science of good diagnostics (not just outsourced tests)? What do you think, doctor? Ready to share?

By: Alan Falkoff, MD, DABFP, FAAFP

Alan Falkoff, MD, DABFP, FAAFP — Thu, 09 Dec 2004 15:16:58 +0000

Info quoted from me was done without my persmission. But so be it. I have been doing this since 6/2003 with nearly a 99+% approval and acceptance from my patients. My patients recognize the costs of continuing to provide the high quality of services I seek to always provide them in the office means I need to offset costs. Malpractice and HIPAA expenses have driven costs to the breaking point. This way the patients share in the risk, they don’t get charged exhorbitant fees, it is shared in a small part among a large number of patients and ultimately only pays about 60-70% of the present Malpractice premium (because Medicare patients are exempt, due to the way the Medicare Laws are written…though in reality they have broken their contract with us because in the RBRVS the reimbursements should have been going UP not down, due to the huge increases in Malpractice premiums these past 4-5 years). The physician then has an ever increased responsibility to provide careful, detailed and quality care to their patients as those patients again as stated before are SHARING in the expense to have someone provide their healthcare. Someone they trust, someone they have confidence in and want to stay in business.

I also charge for all services that are extra services that are provided outside of that specific in office, in exam room patient encounter. E-mail medical treatment when appropriate (saves patients time and money), Forms completion and many others typically in the past the physicians gave away for free but definately all had costs associated with them.

Sincerely,
Alan T. Falkoff, M.D., D.A.B.F.P, F.A.A.F.P.

By: PointOfLaw Forum

PointOfLaw Forum — Mon, 01 Nov 2004 05:47:50 +0000

Around the medblogs
So much to read of late: * MedRants on costs of the system, fee-per-visit malpractice surcharges for patients, and assorted thoughts; * MedPundit reports that “The American College of Radiology [has] once again [taken] action against a member who has…

By: Procare

Procare — Wed, 27 Oct 2004 14:37:14 +0000

Doctors Must Work With Patients, Not Against Them
One of the biggest advantages Doctors have is their incredibly high public approval. According to a poll ProCare conducted earlier this year, almost 80% of respondents had a positive view of doctors. Opponents of medical liability reform have tried to…

By: CHenry

CHenry — Wed, 27 Oct 2004 05:32:53 +0000

Aaron is right. And the upshot should be that as the practice overhead increaases–and not just that caused by the rise in malpractice premiums–then the prices for practice services to the buyer and the consumer–the patient should be able to be increased as well, and not fixed by third-party payers. The problem is that with the government payers, the government allows for itself the privilege to not only fix its own rate, but to limit the
total anyone can charge. Not a free market.

By: Aaron

Aaron — Tue, 26 Oct 2004 23:41:43 +0000

It’s a rather silly system. Malpractice costs should be part of office overhead. Why not tack on a “lobby furniture” fee, as eventually that will need to be replaced, and a “receptionist fee”, because office help is so expensive, and….