Medical Malpractice Reform
Medical Malpractice and Tort Reform Medical malpractice lawsuits are startlingly common and result from a number of reasons. Doctors and medical specialists can make medical errors, missed diagnoses, drug errors and miss test results (Lovenberg, 2015). Doctors can also make surgical errors and anaesthesia mistakes (Lovenberg, 2015). Unfortunately, all of these failures can result in serious injury and often death. Malpractice tort law is a Constitutional right and provides a means for individuals who have suffered from medical negligence to receive reparation for compensatory damages (Lau & Johnson, 2014). However, defendants in these numerous cases disagree with the tort laws and have successfully and unsuccessfully argued for reform
…show more content…
These element are "duty, breach, causation, and damage" (Matzo, 2015). Additionally, there are statutory controls which these element are subject to in malpractice cases (Matzo, 2015). These statutory controls separate malpractice from other personal injury lawsuits (Matzo, 2015). The elements and factors involved in medical malpractice lawsuits make them a challenge to win and the challenge is rightly justified (Matzo, 2015). There are also arguments in defense of medical malpractice, which include disproving medical negligence, proving patient negligence, support of the medical profession, and contributory negligence (Reuters, 2015: Lau & Johnson, 2015). Even though medical malpractice tort law appears to be complete as it stands, some argue it requires …show more content…
These individuals are against malpractice tort reform and even outraged by it (Doroshow, 2009). The Colin Gourley case is a good example where Colin Gourley suffered brain damage and cerebral palsy from medical negligence, but was only awarded a portion of damages as a result of tort reform (Center for Justice & Democracy, n.d.). On the other side of the malpractice tort reform argument are doctors, insurance companies, and perhaps even politicians claiming tort reform is the answer to improved healthcare (Kenney, 2009). Some believe medical doctors are practicing "defensive medicine" because they have to be both lawyers and doctors in their work (Kenney, 2009, p. 1). Kenney (2009) describes a doctor in New Mexico who explains "Medicine is not exact" and "We make diagnosis based on odds" (p. 1). Doctors are not psychic, they cannot perform miracles, and they are human. Both sides of the tort reform argument have very valid points, the question is whether or not medical malpractice tort reform is right, wrong, or necessary. Perhaps there is a better approach to the
These element are "duty, breach, causation, and damage" (Matzo, 2015). Additionally, there are statutory controls which these element are subject to in malpractice cases (Matzo, 2015). These statutory controls separate malpractice from other personal injury lawsuits (Matzo, 2015). The elements and factors involved in medical malpractice lawsuits make them a challenge to win and the challenge is rightly justified (Matzo, 2015). There are also arguments in defense of medical malpractice, which include disproving medical negligence, proving patient negligence, support of the medical profession, and contributory negligence (Reuters, 2015: Lau & Johnson, 2015). Even though medical malpractice tort law appears to be complete as it stands, some argue it requires …show more content…
These individuals are against malpractice tort reform and even outraged by it (Doroshow, 2009). The Colin Gourley case is a good example where Colin Gourley suffered brain damage and cerebral palsy from medical negligence, but was only awarded a portion of damages as a result of tort reform (Center for Justice & Democracy, n.d.). On the other side of the malpractice tort reform argument are doctors, insurance companies, and perhaps even politicians claiming tort reform is the answer to improved healthcare (Kenney, 2009). Some believe medical doctors are practicing "defensive medicine" because they have to be both lawyers and doctors in their work (Kenney, 2009, p. 1). Kenney (2009) describes a doctor in New Mexico who explains "Medicine is not exact" and "We make diagnosis based on odds" (p. 1). Doctors are not psychic, they cannot perform miracles, and they are human. Both sides of the tort reform argument have very valid points, the question is whether or not medical malpractice tort reform is right, wrong, or necessary. Perhaps there is a better approach to the