Virginia’s General Assembly is considering Senate Bill 536 — legislation that started as a “simple little bill” but that, as unexpectedly amended, would radically transform the Commonwealth’s medical liability climate, drive insurers from the state, and make health care less accessible for all Virginians. Legislators need to pump the brakes.
For five decades, Virginia law has set a maximum amount that may be awarded in lawsuits against doctors and other healthcare providers in actions. The General Assembly adopted that law after a careful study it commissioned found that a surge of lawsuits led medical malpractice insurance rates to climb more than 1,000% over a fifteen-year period. That environment was unsustainable for Virginians. The cost and unavailability of insurance led healthcare providers to stop providing services or take early retirement. Younger people, concerned about spending less time in an exam room and more time in a courtroom, were discouraged from entering the medical field.
In response, the legislature set a maximum award of $750,000 in 1976, based on its finding that, above that level, Virginians would lose access to medical care as healthcare providers would have difficulty obtaining affordable malpractice insurance coverage beyond that level. Today, the adjusted amount stands at $2.7 million and is already set to rise to $3 million.
SB 536 started out as a modest, one-sentence change that would have allowed a plaintiff to collect prejudgment interest on top of this maximum award. It unanimously passed the Senate in that form. On March 4, however, a House committee swapped out that bill for a different one.
Now, SB 536 more than doubles the maximum recoverable damages in medical malpractice cases to $6 million, builds in automatic increases tied to medical inflation, and adds up to two years of prejudgment interest on top of that amount. The bill also provides more time for lawyers to file medical malpractice lawsuits. This isn’t a tweak. It is a structural shift that will have serious consequences for Virginians.
Even the bill’s sponsor has described the changes as “whiplash” and not what he intended, though he says he’ll “go with the flow.”
If enacted, the fallout is predictable: higher premiums for doctors and other healthcare providers and fewer options. As liability exposure grows, insurers will reprice the risk, and some are likely to exit the Virginia market altogether—shrinking competition and driving premiums even higher for those who remain. Even physicians who never face a lawsuit will pay more, because higher awards drive settlement demands higher and insurers raise rates across the board.
When malpractice coverage becomes unaffordable, patient care changes. Physicians will reduce exposure by avoiding high‑risk patients and procedures, relocate away from rural areas and urban safety‑net communities, or leave the Commonwealth altogether for states with more stable liability environments. The result is fewer providers, longer wait times, and reduced access to care — especially for patients who already struggle to get it. Already, Virginia’s free clinics have sounded the alarm that, if SB 536 becomes law, they would “cease to exist” because they likely will not be able to afford coverage and lose their volunteer workforce.
Proponents claim SB 536 balances the sudden, substantial increase in the maximum award with “asset protection” for physicians, but that protection is illusory. The bill protects a physician’s personal assets only if the physician carries malpractice insurance equal to the full $6 million and rising award level. This amount is unusually high compared to the national market. Fewer than three percent of independent provider medical malpractice policies exceed $2 million. It is far from clear that insurers will offer policies at this level at all—let alone at prices physicians can afford. Allowing prejudgment interest above the maximum award further expands exposure beyond policy limits, undermining the promised safeguard. And, even if doctors can obtain $6 million in coverage, the bill still puts them personally on the hook if their conduct amounted to “gross neglect,” an allegation that plaintiffs’ lawyers can be expected to make in every case.
Trial lawyers may celebrate SB 536, but patients, physicians, and communities across Virginia will pay the price in higher costs, fewer providers, and diminished access to care. Members of the Virginia General Assembly should not support this legislation in its current form. Doing so risks a health care crisis manufactured entirely by bad policy.
