The overall costs of arbitration cases have been significantly less than the cases that have gone to court (1/2 to 1/3 the cost for similar cases), according to Utah’s arbitration guru Elliott Williams, JD.

Perhaps this is why only a few of the legal "high rollers" like Jim McConkie, JD, (whose last shot at IHC netted a $9 million jury award) are actively campaigning to gut Utah’s current law, which the Utah Trial Attorneys Association agreed to last year when the six-year trial period was added as an amendment.

I agree that IHC’s specific agreement is too one-sided and needs to be changed. But this is a job for the market, not the legislature. If enough people are upset about the specifics of IHC’s agreement, IHC will change it in order to keep their business coming in. As Utah legislator Ed Mayne noted in the newspaper recently, IHC has come to the table and is making revisions to its agreement based on the public outcry. I think we should let that process play out and see what comes of it before crawling to the legislature for restrictions that will apply to all who use arbitration.

By the way, I noticed that Parley Hellewell’s bill (SB 117) has a serious Constitutional Note added to it by the Office of Legislative Research. So, even if it should pass (doubtful), it could easily be struck down for violating the Federal Arbitration Act.

As much as people like to think otherwise, health care is not yet a civil right. If healthcare should ever become a right, then the government will have the responsibility of providing it equally to all citizens. Until that time, however, physicians should maintain the right to choose the conditions under which they are willing provide their services, just like any other private business. The right to contract is just as valid as the right to a jury trial, even more so if you understand that the Seventh Amendment to the U.S. Constitution has never been incorporated to apply to the states. Utah’s constitution says that a citizen may demand a jury trial in civil cases. But if they do, we maintain that physicians should have the right to respond by saying, "If you demand the right to drag me though the hell of litigation to resolve a dispute, then perhaps you are too big a risk for me to take on as a patient."

[Editor’s Note: Mark Fotheringham is the Director of Communications for the Utah Medical Association. However, the views expressed are his own.]