HOUSE BILL REPORT

ESB 5972

As Amended by the House

BYSenators Bottiger and Newhouse

Limiting liability of persons involved in professional peer review bodies for health care professionals.

House Committe on Judiciary

Majority Report:  Do pass with amendment.  (11)

      Signed by Representatives Armstrong, Chair; Brough, Hargrove, Heavey, Locke, Moyer, Padden, Patrick, Schmidt, Scott and Wang.

House Staff:Charlies Gavigan (786-7340)

AS PASSED HOUSE APRIL 9, 1987

BACKGROUND:

Physician peer review boards are panels which review the competence and professional conduct of doctors.  A physician who is disciplined by a peer review board may bring a lawsuit against the board claiming the decision was an attempt to decrease competition and therefor a violation of antitrust laws.  This could limit the effectiveness of physician peer review boards.

In 1986, Congress enacted a statute which provides antitrust immunity for decisions of physician peer review boards that attempt in good faith to discover and discipline incompetent physicians and invites state law to assist peer review boards.  This federal statute automatically takes effect in Washington on October 14, 1989, unless the legislature specifically rejects it.  The effective date may be made immediate by state legislation.

SUMMARY:

Remedies are set forth for peer review decisions to discipline health care professionals that are based on matters not related to competence or professional conduct.  The remedies are:  injunctive relief (reinstatement) and the recovery of lost earnings incurred between the date of the peer review decision and the date the action is reversed.  The prevailing party is allowed to recover reasonable attorneys' fees and costs.

Information inadmissible in a civil action is limited to matters under review by the board or that have been reviewed by a board; present law limits the inadmissible information to matters subject to evaluation, which is broader in scope.  Present law is maintained regarding the inadmissibility of the reason for termination of a staff member's privileges to use a hospital or clinic.

Fiscal Note:      Not Requested.

House Committee ‑ Testified For:    Cliff Webster, Washington State Medical Association.

House Committee - Testified Against:      None Presented.

House Committee - Testimony For:    The public health and welfare is dependent on professional and competent health care providers.  The act will enable the physician peer groups to do a more thorough job in addressing incompetence and unprofessionalism in the health care field.

House Committee - Testimony Against:      None Presented.