The Impact of Medical Malpractice Reforms

2020 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
pp. 405-419
Author(s):  
Jing Liu ◽  
David A. Hyman

This article evaluates the effects of medical malpractice reform on claiming, malpractice premiums, physician supply, and defensive medicine. We conclude that damage caps materially reduce claim frequency, payouts per claim, and total payouts. The effects of damage caps on malpractice premiums, physician supply, and defensive medicine are more modest. It is difficult to quantify the impact of reforms other than damage caps—partly because reforms are typically adopted as a package deal, and partly because of the limitations of the available data. We close by identifying three areas that would benefit from more research.

1996 ◽  
Vol 14 (3) ◽  
pp. 277-284 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jacqueline Corrigan ◽  
Judith Wagner ◽  
Leah Wolfe ◽  
David Klingman ◽  
Philip Polishuk

2015 ◽  
Vol 23 ◽  
Author(s):  
Muh Endriyo Susila

Criminal prosecution of doctors due to medical malpractice has created controversy in Indonesia. The purpose of the research is to find out the impact of criminal prosecution of doctors in Indonesia, particularly those due to medical malpractice cases. The data were collected through both library-based study and field study in the form of interviews. It is found that criminal prosecution of doctors in the context of medical malpractice has brought about negative consequences such as the exploitation of doctors by law enforcement officers and the practice of defensive medicine. It is found that criminal prosecution of doctors due to medical malpractice should be limited in order to promote justice in the medical malpractice issue. The article concludes with some elaboration on the necessary reforms required in regard to the law relating to medical malpractice in Indonesia.


Author(s):  
Sidney A. Shapiro ◽  
Thomas Owen McGarity ◽  
Nicholas W. Vidargas ◽  
James Goodwin

1995 ◽  
Vol 21 (2-3) ◽  
pp. 281-300
Author(s):  
Jody Weisberg Menon

Pleas for reform of the legal system are common. One area of the legal system which has drawn considerable scholarly attention is the jury system. Courts often employ juries as fact-finders in civil cases according to the Seventh Amendment of the Constitution: “In Suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved … .” The general theory behind the use of juries is that they are the most capable fact-finders and the bestsuited tribunal for arriving at the most accurate and just outcomes. This idea, however, has been under attack, particularly by those who claim that cases involving certain difficult issues or types of evidence are an inappropriate province for lay jurors who typically have no special background or experience from which to make informed, fair decisions.The legal system uses expert witnesses to assist triers of fact in understanding issues which are beyond their common knowledge or difficult to comprehend.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document