Skip to main content

Currently Skimming:

Legislative Proposals on Medical Professional Liability Regarding the Delivery of Maternal and Child Health Care
Pages 213-228

The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.


From page 213...
... and the American Hospital Association (AHA) , for example, recently issued their own proposals.
From page 214...
... General Accounting Office (GAO) analyzed national medical malpractice claims data.3 The GAO estimated that 73,472 medical malpractice claims were closed in 1984.
From page 215...
... Paul Fire and Marine Insurance Company, the largest medical malpractice insurer in the United States.8 Most of the changes made by these six states were in response to the crisis of the mid-1970s and focus on tort reforms that were designed to ensure the availability and reduce the cost of malpractice insurance. Rather than enacting reforms to change the way public bodies and peer groups regulate health care providers, the states' responses change the way in which the insurance industry is regulated or help to develop realistic consumer expectations about the health care delivery system.
From page 217...
... Those measures aimed at tort reform include limitations on the doctrine of joint and several liability, limits on noneconomic damages, limits on punitive damages, modification of the collateral source rule, limits on attorneys' fees, imposition of screening panels, special statutes of limitations, structured payments of high verdicts, and restrictions on pie-in-the-sky "ad damnum" claims for damages. Of these reforms, four are most likely to have a positive effect on the cost of medical malpractice defense and the high cost of medical mal
From page 218...
... A 1982 Rand study found that relaxation ofthe collateral source rule reduced potential verdicts by 18 percent.~3 Many states have abolished or modified the collateral source rule in medical malpractice actions.~4 Such measures may have only a modest effect on verdict amounts, however, because a reduction made to offset other damages received will not affect the higher cost noneconomic damage items. The effect on settlement negotiations, however, should be greater, as defense counsel can argue reductions in basic claims during this process.
From page 219...
... As more of the money in a settlement reaches the plaintiff, total settlement amounts should decline. The Rand study observed that limits on contingent fee schedules cut the average settlement by 9 percent.
From page 220...
... Many states require, or authorize at the discretion of the court, structured payments for verdicts over a certain amount. Thus, there is an incentive to settle for a lower amount in cases in which the plaintiff has suffered serious future damages yet wants immediate access to a Jump sum.22 Of the three types of damage reform measures, caps on damages have the greatest potential for reducing noneconomic losses.23 The Rand study found that a cap on verdicts reduced the average projected settlement by 25 percent, raised the portion of cases dropped by 12 percent, and reduced the number of cases going to trial by 5 percent.
From page 221...
... to make a commitment to pay the patient's net economic loss resulting from the event. The patient would be entitled to complete reimbursement of outof-pocket losses, such as lost wages and extra medical expenses, minus any payment available to the patient from third parties, such as the
From page 222...
... Net economic loss is a reasonable standard of compensation, prompt payment of which would greatly benefit injured patients. It would encompass the out-of-pocket cost of continued medical and hospital care, rehabilitation, nursing care, wage loss, housekeeping services, and adaptation of the patient's house and car, as well as reasonable attorney fees incurred in advising the patient.
From page 223...
... For quality enhancement, the bill contains provisions that prohibit incompetent physicians and other health care professionals from practicing and that provide immunity from suit for persons reviewing and determining whether treatment was proper; it also requires that state licensing authorities be notified of adverse actions (termination of privileges) ; and it provides immunity and confidentiality for persons who report incidents of malpractice.
From page 224...
... It would further have abolished the collateral source rule, authorized dismissal of frivolous claims, capped noneconomic damages at $250,000, authorized structured award payments, prescribed procedures and standards to govern judicial review of pane] decisions, established a schedule of attorneys' fees, and fixed a statute of limitations.
From page 225...
... Thus, the AMA's proposal would take malpractice out of the judicial tort system. The report further recommends limiting noneconomic damages to $150,000-$170,000, depending on life expectancy; abolishing joint and several liability so that liability is limited to each party's percentage of negligence; establishing a two-year statute of limitations; requiring structured payments on awards above a certain amount; changing the informed consent rule to what a reasonable patient would want to know; abolishing the collateral source rule; and allowing the administrative board to review the reasonableness of attorneys' fees.
From page 226...
... 1987) (abrogation of collateral source rule violated state equal protection clause)
From page 227...
... 1988. A Proposed Alternative to the Civil Justice System for Resolving Medical Liability Disputes: A Fault-Based, Administrative System.


This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More information on Chapter Skim is available.