A state medical malpractice law passed in Connecticut in 2005 that its proponents stated was a necessary tort reform to drive down medical premiums and costs is now facing a backlash from a growing number of critics in that state.

The dialogue that has resulted is of relevance in Kentucky and elsewhere throughout the country, as it speaks to the window of opportunity available for plaintiffs to bring lawsuits, as well as the need for medical professionals to be held accountable for mistakes that cause death and injuries to patients.

The Connecticut legislation was heavily backed by insurance companies and the medical profession, with advocates saying it was desperately needed to close the door on frivolous claims. The law inserted an addendum into existing law requiring that every malpractice claim be accompanied by an opinion from a medical expert called a certificate of merit that confirms that a claim is valid and being brought in good faith.

Backers of the law say that it has worked admirably as a screening process.

Critics from across a diverse spectrum of interests, conversely, decry the legislation, stating that it chills lawsuits and bars a number of meritorious claims.

Opponents include some of the very legislators who passed the law, who now say that it was drafted too narrowly. They want to see another bill drafted.

"I don't think anyone should be barred from the courthouse doors before the merits are heard," says one Republican state senator.

The Center for Justice and Democracy has also weighed in concerning the oft-advanced argument that the law lowers insurance rates.

Patently, it does not, the center notes in a report stating that rate levels owe almost exclusively to the economy and insurers' financial performance.

"The certificate of merit is weeding out legitimate cases," says the center's executive director.

Source: Claims Journal, "Connecticut law nixing legitimate malpractice lawsuits" Dave Collins, Jan. 10, 2012