Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Medical Malpractice topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Senate committee advances proposal to exempt children under 10 from medical-malpractice damages cap; hospitals and insurers oppose
Summary
Senate Bill 904 would create an exemption to the statutory medical-malpractice damages cap for injured children under age 10. Sponsors argued catastrophic childhood injuries require lifetime care beyond the current cap; hospital, insurer and provider groups warned of higher premiums, reduced access and fiscal impacts and asked for more study.
Senate Bill 904 would create an exception to Virginia’s current $2.65 million cap on non-economic and total medical-malpractice damages for injuries to children under age 10. Sponsors said the cap disproportionately harms children who suffer catastrophic injuries that require lifelong care.
Senator Stanley, sponsor, said many severely injured children will require extraordinary lifetime medical care and that the existing cap often leaves families without resources as insurers and subrogation claims take much of the available settlement dollars. A parent who testified described the long-term, high-cost care his son requires following a near–birth injury and urged lawmakers to consider lifetime medical needs.
Representatives of hospitals, physician groups, nursing organizations and insurers urged caution. They said Milliman actuarial work and the committee-convened stakeholder discussions indicate that removing or substantially increasing the cap for this cohort would likely increase claim frequency and severity, raise malpractice premiums, threaten access—especially in underserved areas—and could shift costs to Medicaid and state-funded programs. They asked the committee to allow the stakeholder work group more time to develop guardrails and alternatives that might protect children without destabilizing coverage or access.
The committee debated the trade-offs before voting to refer the bill to the Senate Finance Committee for fiscal review and follow-up. Sponsors argued for a narrow, children-only exemption and suggested a five-year sunset as a possible compromise to assess impacts; opponents warned a sunset would not mitigate premium spikes or the potential market exit of coverage carriers.
Why it matters: The bill addresses a lasting policy tension between limiting malpractice liability to control medical costs and providing full compensation for catastrophic, lifelong harms—especially for children who need long-term care. The committee sent the measure for fiscal study and further review.
