Using QALYs in a Tort Law Context. Assessing Pain and Suffering Damages

Keyword(s):  
Tort Law ◽  
1995 ◽  
Vol 108 (8) ◽  
pp. 1785 ◽  
Author(s):  
Steven P. Croley ◽  
Jon D. Hanson
Keyword(s):  
Tort Law ◽  

2019 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Thi Bao Anh Nguyen

Abstract Medical malpractice is a form of professional negligence and such a negligence forms part of the law of tort. As an alternative to the tort or fault-based system in medical malpractice, a no-fault compensation system has been viewed as having the potential to overcome problems inherent in the tort system. This is through the provision of fair, speedy and adequate compensation for medically injured victims. A no-fault compensation system allows patients to be compensated without proof of provider’s fault or negligence. Similar to no-fault schemes, the strict liability system is not fault-based although it belongs to tort law. Successful claims are paid in a uniform manner using a fixed benefits schedule and include compensation for both economic and non-economic (pain and suffering losses) without the necessity of proving negligence through a tort claim. This study focuses on the comparison of no-fault compensation systems versus strict liability systems between Vietnam to Belgium, France, and England. The distinctions in Belgium, France, and England can be the lessons for the development of a no-fault compensation system as well as strict liability system in Vietnam.


Author(s):  
Yoed Halbersberg ◽  
Ehud Guttel

The chapter discusses the contributions of cognitive psychology and behavioral studies to the research of tort law. These contributions, we show, relate to a wide range of issues in torts: from the basic decision to impose tort liability, through the choice between liability rules, to specific rules and remedies. Accordingly, behavioral studies are of particular significance for the analysis of the tort system. The literature review focuses on contributions made to three key elements of tort law: the choice between liability regimes; the choice between tort liability and regulation (including the choice between harm-based and risk-based liability); and damages (in particular, punitive damages and damages for pain and suffering). The chapter also offers two new avenues for future research: vicarious liability and people’s perceptions of the variability among large groups of tort victims.


2021 ◽  
Vol 29 (1) ◽  
pp. 27-53
Author(s):  
Ivo Smrž ◽  
Tomáš Doležal

The article focuses on the tort law concerning the deduction of benefits from damages for personal injury (compensatio lucri cum damno), i.e. in the Czech law in relation to the compensation for pain and suffering, deteriorated social position and other non-pecuniary harm. At first, the article deals in general with problematic aspects associated with benefit deduction from damages for personal injury. This will be followed by an analysis of the various doctrinal and judicial opinions and the criteria according to which the relevant cases could be assessed and solved, including the available (German and Austrian) case law. The conclusion of the article will be aimed at typical groups of cases in connection with the relevant criteria for their assessment.


2003 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 5-5
Author(s):  
Sheila Wendler

Abstract Attorneys use the term pain and suffering to indicate the subjective, intangible effects of an individual's injury, and plaintiffs may seek compensation for “pain and suffering” as part of a personal injury case although it is not usually an element of a workers’ compensation case. The AMA Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment (AMA Guides), Fifth Edition, provides guidance for rating pain qualitatively or quantitatively in certain cases, but, because of the subjectivity and privateness of the patient's experience, the AMA Guides offers no quantitative approach to assessing “pain and suffering.” The AMA Guides also cautions that confounders of pain behaviors and perception of pain include beliefs, expectations, rewards, attention, and training. “Pain and suffering” is challenging for all parties to value, particularly in terms of financial damages, and using an individual's medical expenses as an indicator of “pain and suffering” simply encourages excessive diagnostic and treatment interventions. The affective component, ie, the uniqueness of this subjective experience, makes it difficult for others, including evaluators, to grasp its meaning. Experienced evaluators recognize that a myriad of factors play a role in the experience of suffering associated with pain, including its intensity and location, the individual's ability to conceptualize pain, the meaning ascribed to pain, the accompanying injury or illness, and the social understanding of suffering.


1969 ◽  
Vol 14 (2) ◽  
pp. 100-101
Author(s):  
RICHARD A. STERNBACH
Keyword(s):  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document