Economics of Oligopoly: Medical Malpractice Insurance as a Classic Illustration

1987 ◽  
Vol 54 (3) ◽  
pp. 502 ◽  
Author(s):  
Blaine F. Nye ◽  
Alfred E. Hofflander
Keyword(s):  
Medical Malpractice ◽  
Malpractice Insurance ◽  
Medical Malpractice Insurance

The Anti-Patient Psychology of Health Courts: Prescriptions from a Lawyer-Physician

2010 ◽  
Vol 36 (1) ◽  
pp. 188-220 ◽  
Author(s):  
Freeman L. Farrow
Keyword(s):  
Medical Malpractice ◽  
The United States ◽  
Specialized Knowledge ◽  
Malpractice Litigation ◽  
Insurance Premiums ◽  
Malpractice Insurance ◽  
Malpractice Claims ◽  
Practice Of Medicine ◽  
Tort System ◽  
Medical Malpractice Insurance

Critics of the current medical malpractice tort system claim that adjudication of malpractice claims before generalist judges and lay juries contributes to rising costs of medical malpractice insurance premiums and medical care. They claim that properly deciding issues in this realm requires specialized knowledge of medicine and medical technology that juries, and even judges of general jurisdiction, do not possess. One lobbying group alleges there is a continuing medical malpractice litigation crisis in the United States, evidenced by increasing medical costs, deaths from needless medical errors, departure of physicians from the practice of medicine due to increasing medical malpractice insurance premiums, and random medical justice in medical malpractice cases. Whether there is a direct, causal correlation between the increasing cost of medical malpractice insurance premiums and medical malpractice litigation is debatable.

Recent Changes in Medical—Legal Statutory and Case Law and Their Application to Cosmetic Surgery

1986 ◽  
Vol 3 (3) ◽  
pp. 3-6
Author(s):  
Edwin E. Breitenbach
Keyword(s):  
Cosmetic Surgery ◽  
Medical Malpractice ◽  
Insurance Coverage ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Appellate Court ◽  
Specific Response ◽  
Court System ◽  
Malpractice Litigation ◽  
Malpractice Insurance ◽  
Medical Malpractice Insurance

In the mid 1970s medical malpractice insurance carriers, faced with huge increases in both the number of claims and the size of awards, elected either to discontinue writing medical malpractice insurance policies or to raise premiums for this type of insurance by a factor of two or three. Faced with the prospect of unavailability of affordable medical malpractice insurance many physicians elected to go without any malpractice coverage, went into early retirement terminating their practices altogether, or narrowed the scope of their practices to eliminate those procedures which carried an inordinately high risk of medical malpractice litigation. In response to the potential unavailability of adequate health care because of the impending medical malpractice insurance crisis many states enacted remedial emergency legislation in an attempt to deal with the crisis by providing an incentive for insurance carriers to either reenter the medical malpractice field or for those remaining to limit their proposed premium increases substantially. California was one of those states which enacted broad remedial legislation. In addition other states enacted legislation quite similar to California's. An attempt will be made to review those statutes passed by California in specific response to the medical malpractice crisis and their history as they underwent constitutional attack in the California appellate court system. The legislation reviewed here is of course applicable only in California. However, many other states have enacted comparable legislation and many jurisdictions currently are considering statutory changes which would parallel California's laws. California's current statutes dealing with medical malpractice litigation could be considered a model for those jurisdictions currently facing a crisis in affordability or availability of malpractice insurance coverage.

How to End the Crisis in Medical Malpractice Insurance

Challenge ◽  
1988 ◽  
Vol 31 (2) ◽  
pp. 36-41
Author(s):  
Roger D. Blair ◽  
Marvin Dewar
Keyword(s):  
Medical Malpractice ◽  
Malpractice Insurance ◽  
Medical Malpractice Insurance

scholarly journals Dialogue With A Neurosurgeon: Toward A Dépeçage Approach To Achieve Tort Reform And Preserve Corrective Justice In Medical Malpractice Cases

2009 ◽  
Vol 71 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeffrey A. Van Detta
Keyword(s):  
Legal System ◽  
Medical Malpractice ◽  
Prima Facie ◽  
Corrective Justice ◽  
Real Problem ◽  
Prima Facie Case ◽  
Insurance Premiums ◽  
Malpractice Insurance ◽  
Malpractice Claims ◽  
Medical Malpractice Insurance

Doctors are taking their frustrations about the costs of medical malpractice insurance premiums to the street; striking and even leaving certain states where premiums are higher have been staples of the news in the last year. Politicians are responding by shifting the blame to the “tort” system, which they characterize as dominated by “greedy” trial lawyers (with the implicit accusation that the lawyers are bringing unfounded claims against “good” doctors) and “runaway” juries (with the implicit assertion that juries render plaintiffs’ verdicts in unfounded cases and give away the insurer’s money with abandon through unjustifiably generous damages awards). The “bad actor” in the shared visions of many doctors and politicians is the civil legal system itself—and the “reforms” that are being touted (such as damages caps) are blunt instruments designed, it seems, to disable the ability of the legal system to adjudicate medical malpractice claims. To the extent that the civil legal system is a contributing factor to medical malpractice insurance premiums (an important topic beyond our ken here), the problem cannot be addressed in so sweeping a fashion. There are other key interests involved—principles of law, in the sense described by Ronald Dworkin, upon which the rules of medical malpractice litigation are based. Those principles of law, including the principle of corrective justice, will be sacrificed if such heavy handed measures are adopted. The real problem, however, can be viewed as a much more subtle one, requiring finer tools of analysis to diagnose and repair. The level of subtlety is deep—as deep as the elements of the traditional prima facie case of medical malpractice, and the standard of care in particular—and requires more sophisticated analytic constructs to understand, analyze, and ultimately reform. I hope to develop some of those analytic tools in this article.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document