ACA Struck down by TX federal judge.

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

New Zealand patients don't actually have the right to sue for malpractice and only 40% of the people who try to sue for damages manage to wade through the legal system to be compensated at all... 

That's somewhat misleading.  True, you don't sue for medical malpractice here, but you CAN be compensated for any injuries resulting from medical mistreatment.

Suppose you get injured during a surgery, or are given the wrong medication for a case of the never-get-overs. You file your claim directly with the government, via the Accident Compensation Corporation (you can hire a lawyer to represent you, but it isn't necessary).  If your claim is denied, you can appeal. If the appeal goes against you, you have the right to sue.  But you don't sue the doctor or the hospital, you sue the government.

This has a lot of advantages.  It discourages frivolous claims, doctors don't have to carry malpractice insurance, lowers overall healthcare coasts, and it frees up the courts for more pressing business.

As for the '40%' mentioned above, this information is outdated (the white paper cited is seven years old) - about 70% of people who apply for compensation get it. This is due largely to a review which resulted in the ACC allowing more minor injuries to qualify. Around 90% of the rejected claims that make it to a court appeal are determined be either frivolous or fraudulent.

I agree that the US couldn't adopt single-payer as things stand there now.  It would have to go hand in hand with tort reform.

Boru