In 1990, a Harvard Medical Practice study came to the conclusion that 95,000 deaths a year in the United States are attributable to medical malpractice. Not surprisingly, an additional 700,000 individuals are subject to injury as a result of medical malpractice. These numbers can jar even the most dispassionate observer. A jumbo jet would have to crash every day for 30 a year to reproduce these casualties. Despite the multitudes of people who die or suffer as a result of medical malpractice, fewer than 2,100 doctors a year are disciplined in connection with a malpractice claim. Of those health care providers that do come under scrutiny and censure, the lion's share of them are subject to sanctions on the premises of substance abuse or fraud, rather than malpractice. These facts resurface at a time when federal legislators are considering measures to limit the monetary amount a patient can claim as compensation for damages incurred as a result of medical malpractice.

It is the hope of lawmakers in capping jury awards to plaintiffs that it may be possible to reverse the tide of rising health care costs. Since those costs are ultimately imposed on patients in the form of insurance premiums, the reigning logic dictates that limits on awards will save the patient money, and bring the cost of high quality healthcare within the reach of more Americans. However, the soundness of this approach is called into question when we consider that a Congressional Budget Office report found that only one percent of national health care costs results from the expense of malpractice insurance premiums being passed on to the patient. However, accidents, misdiagnosis and conflicting prescriptions cost the nation nearly sixty billion dollars a year.

Even with these losses imposed on patients and on taxpayers yearly, less than half a percent of all civil cases in state courts sought to charge doctors with medical malpractice. The 2000 plus doctors who are disciplined each year amount to hardly one percent of all acting health care providers. Thus the amount of money going back into the hands of victims is a relatively inconsequential contribution to the overall cost of health care in America when compared to the cost of making good the harm of malpractice. Rising health care costs may more predictably be driven back by improving the way in which the health care industry polices itself and removing unreliable doctors from practice.

1. The main theme of this passage can be summarized as:

(A) Widespread policing is the answer to cutting health care costs.
(B) Health care costs are the result of too few of the guilty being held accountable.
(C) The source of high health care costs is difficult to localize.
(D) Rising health care costs have more to do with the behavior of doctors than with the behavior of patients.
(E) Traditional government approaches to the health care issue have been disappointing.



2. The main purpose of comparing the number of malpractice victims to the number of jumbo jet accident casualties is

(A) to exemplify how a dispassionate observer could be caught off guard
(B) to show that even if we do not consider the several hundred thousand injured, the number of people who die from malpractice every year is absurdly high
(C) to compare the gravity of airline accidents to the seriousness of medical malpractice
(D) to note the disparity between airline safety regulations and health care oversight
(E) to point out the similarity between the number of people killed in air crashes and the number killed through medical malpractice



3. The main concern voiced over the penalties levied on rogue practitioners is

(A) penalties are given out for the wrong reasons
(B) penalties given out are not severe enough
(C) penalties are given out to only a few
(D) penalties are given out to the wrong offenders
(E) penalties given out are not levied with enough charges to be a threat



4. The implication of the Congressional Budget Office report is that

(A) awards from malpractice claims are not a substantial source of health care costs
(B) placing a limit on malpractice claims will significantly reduce the cost of health care to the end user
(C) malpractice insurance premiums are not as high as they could be
(D) congressional research is polarized and thus often contradictory
(E) insurance companies only charge what is fair based on the size of claims and the number of claimants



5. The author of this passage would most likely agree with the argument that

(A) insurance companies will try to inflate their rate of return on premiums
(B) the cost of health care is inflated by the availability of expensive treatments
(C) doctors are compelled to reduce their services in order to cover their own expenses
(D) patients could reduce the cost of health care by being more careful in the home, using generic drugs, and seeking a second opinion
(E) the cost of health care is increased by the negligence of doctors



6. The purpose of the sentence beginning with "Despite the multitudes..." and the sentence beginning with "These facts resurface..." is to

(A) demonstrate the underlying logic for capping jury awards
(B) remind readers that those who do not remember history are doomed to repeat it
(C) note that this subject is contemporary and topical
(D) show that Congress is operating under a false premise
(E) show that things are not always as they appear



7. The conclusion that greater policing of doctors will reduce the incidence of malpractice and drive down costs assumes that

(A) most doctors are not up to their responsibilities
(B) many more doctors are guilty of substance abuse and fraud than the portion accused
(C) policing will encourage doctors to improve their performance
(D) doctors will never protect one another from investigation on the grounds that they believe they are best equipped to make decisions for the patients
(E) there is unchecked corruption among doctors



8. The notion of reducing jury awards places the blame for high health care costs most directly on:

(A) Patients
(B) Medical malpractice
(C) Controlling doctors
(D) The inability of the justice system to work with the health care system
(E) Lawsuits