Tort Law Reform Research Paper

In the article “Despite Counsel, Victim Is Hindered by tort laws.” The author Becca Aaronson, explains that sometimes tort laws may not feel fair. Connie Spears is just an ordinary woman who went to the Emergency because she felt some pain in her legs which she told the hospital she is known to have blood clots but, after being checked by the doctors they sent her home with a minor diagnoses. Just a short few days later she ended up in a different hospital with serious illness that caused her to loose both of her legs. She then filed a medical malpractice law suit but, she had to produce adequate expert reports within 120 days of filing their cases or she will be ordered to pay the defendants court fees. Connie Spears argues that

In many ways, the hospital system in America is set up mirroring our government. They are similar in the way that checks and balances have been set in place to ensure the best possible care is delivered to patients. With these checks and balances there are three main bodies; the governing board, medical staff, and executive management (Showalter, 2017). The duties and responsibilities of each body many times is to oversee and continually check the others. A prime example of this system can be seen through the case of Moore v. The Board of Trustees of Carson-Tahoe Hospital, which took place in Nevada and was heard before the Supreme Court of the state in 1972 (Moore v. Board of Trustees of Carson-Tahoe Hospital, 1972). Specifically, in this case, the duty of the governing board to “exercise reasonable care in selecting and retaining medical staff” is questioned in contrast with the right of the physician to have “due process… when disciplinary action is taken” (Showalter, 2017). In hopes of changing a decision by the governing board, and attempting to reverse the decision of a lower court, the appellant, Dr. Moore, brought the case against Carson-Tahoe Hospital (Moore v. Board of Trustees of Carson-Tahoe Hospital, 1972).

The Plaintiffs felt that since the hospital was licensed and accredited that they should be held responsible for their employees and their actions. It states in the regulations that any infraction of the bylaws imposes liability for the injury. At any time if Dr. Alexander had questions or concerns he could have reached out to an expert in this field to consult

This proceeding before a Medical Review Panel, pursuant to La. Rev. Stat. §§ 40:1299.41, et seq., is brought by Jimmy Martinez against multiple health care providers, including Dr. Mark Kappelman, a qualified health care provider entitled to have the claim filed against him reviewed by this Panel. The claims made against Dr. Kappelman are mere allegations without support and proof. In a medical malpractice case the burden of proof is on the claimant to establish that Dr. Mark Kappelman’s actions in this matter fell below the standard of care required of similar health care providers. The claimant also bears the burden of proving whether any such alleged act or acts of negligence caused any injuries. It is the duty of the

Since about the mid-late 1980’s many states have implemented and enforced statutes to limit tort lawsuits. Tort reform is the political term for redefining tort laws and reducing tort litigation, damages, compensation, and even amounts awarded (Quinn). The reformation of the nation’s tort system, or changing laws throughout a state dealing with injuries to a person or their property have done a lot more harm than good for consumers. While each tort reform law varies depending on the state, they all have one of the following goals in mind: “(1) to make it more difficult for injured people to file a lawsuit, (2) to make it more difficult for injured people to obtain a jury trial, (3) to place limits on the amount of money injured people receive in a lawsuit (Lane).”

It is this author’s belief that no entities should stand in the way of an individual’s right to seek counsel, regardless of outcome. The ramifications of not suing a HMO could demonstrate no evidence to support efforts to amend the current law, and without legal documents demonstrating the consequences related to denial of care, the rights of patients, to ensure a safe and effective health care, according to standards of practice, may be compromised.

Although the Canadian malpractice law is just and designed to provide a victim of malpractice a way to recover compensatory damages to subside the impact of injury or loss, the system of law is not fair to the victim and does not provide a level playing field.

The defensive medicine strategy may not be cost efficient, but many doctors agree that having the best defense will ultimately result in giving better care. (Bricker,

Just across the Tasman Sea is New Zealand who provides a straight-forward system of distributive justice through a ‘no-fault’ compensation system that is funded through general taxation and an employer levy. Under the system, patients are compensated for medical injuries within weeks and in turn surrender their right to sue for damages for personal injury. Similarly, their medical malpractice system punishes under-diagnosis which provides an incentive for practitioners to take more care rather than acting controversially.

These barriers include the state practice and licensure, physician related issues, payer policies, and other barriers. CNPs are faced with barriers pertaining to the state licensure that regulates their practice. The barriers can impede their ability to practice to the fullest extent of their training and education (Hain, & Fleck, 2014). This restrictive scope of practice can result in serious consequences that can interfere with accessible care. According to Hain, and Flecker, (2014), other barriers includes lack of physicians support for CNP, sticker payer policies regulation imposed on the CNPs, which has limited their ability from practicing independently, and the lack of recognition of CNPs as a primary care provider by some insurance company, which has forced them to bill for care of services under a physician’s

Another argument against Tort reform is that according to the Los Angeles Times, although many medical malpractice lawsuits are deemed frivolous, defensive medicine only accounts for a very small percentage of overall health care spending. This argument is supported by this article :

When considering the legalities of this scenario, negligence, vicarious liability, and physician- patient relationship are a few components that affect the outcome of a lawsuit. The amount of legal torts that were violated in this case was enough to cause disputes between patients and healthcare staff. Negligence is a familiar tort that occurs much more than it needs too. Unfortunately in this case, vicarious liability and patient-physician relationship are two considerations that influence this case as well.

From a personal standpoint I believe that the excessiveness of litigation is hurting the field of healthcare due to the affects in many different areas. It reduces access that patients need. Due to the misuse and disloyal antics of people making false accusations to self gain we will continue to see a rise in healthcare. I do not feel that all accusations are false, but I do believe that litigation has become successful due to dishonesty. In order for there to be financial distress for us all as a country we must flow diligently with each other. From a malpractice standpoint they need to ensure that their patients are taken care of to the best of their ability and that they are taking the precautions needed to ensure no

The ATRA and CALA are trying to stop minor cases from receiving enormous sums of money which will dampen the economy. The subject matter of these cases varies to some length including but not limited to medical and car insurance. In a case against Rich Mountain Nursing and Rehabilitation Center of Mena, jurors found the defendant, Mena, guilty of malpractice in the death of Margaretha Sauer, a ninety-three year old woman. The non-economic punitive damages cash award for the suffering and pain of the Sauer family to be paid by Mena was seventy-eight million dollars. Punitive damages is one of the issues that the ATRA is trying to combat. If nursing homes continue to have pay large sums for punitive damages, they will not be able to survive. The premium average liability offered by nursing homes has increased from $820,000 in 1999 to $11.6 million in 2001. With the liability premiums continuing to rise, the prospects of profits continue to dwindle. They will have no chance at retaining a profit and thus will have to close. It will also mean that doctors will charge more for their services, which leads to fewer health insurances carrying

First, assembly line medicine has caused the rise of malpractice suits, often for trivial matters, leading to doctor practicing what Peter Ubel deems ‘defensive medicine.’ In this version of medicine, doctors tend to order many tests, prescribe ineffective medicines, and call in specialists to check their work to avoid being sued. Another side effect is fee-for-service medicine, in which, “The provider is rewarded for customer encounters, procedures delivered, and boxes checked in the health record. S/ he makes more money by doing this as fast as possible …