Skip to main content

The Case for Legal Reform

  • Chapter
  • 767 Accesses

Abstract

The rising cost of claims has fueled a dramatic rise in the cost of medical malpractice insurance in the United States. Increasing severity has driven malpractice tort costs beyond $20 billion per year. A significant percentage of America’s doctors are defendants in malpractice litigation and more than 600 new claims are initiated daily. Malpractice claims do not reliably identify “bad” doctors. In high-risk specialties, virtually all physicians are potential litigation targets. Other factors contributing to the increased cost of malpractice insurance include falling interest rates, higher costs for reinsurance, shrinking capacity, and judicial nullification of existing legal reforms.

More than a quarter century’s experience with California’s Medical Injury Compensation Reform Act (MICRA) statutes provides ample evidence that reforms are well defined and effective. In the absence of these reforms, it is predictable that the current crisis will worsen and access to fundamental medical services will be increasingly imperiled.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Medical Liability Monitor. 2003 rate survey shows rates still on the rise, underwriting tougher, no end in sight. Medical Liability Monitor. Vol. 28, 2003:1–20.

    Google Scholar 

  2. US Department of Health and Human Services. Confronting the New Health Care Crisis: Improving Health Care Quality and Lowering Costs by Fixing Our Medical Liability System. Washington, DC, 2002:1–28.

    Google Scholar 

  3. United States General Accounting Office. Medical Malpractice: Implications of Rising Premiums on Access to Health Care. Washington, DC, 2003:57.

    Google Scholar 

  4. AMA. Medical Liability Reform—NOW! Chicago, 2003:29.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Harming Patient Access to Care: Implications of Excessive Litigation. Subcommittee on Health, Committee on Energy and Commerce, US House of Representatives. Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office, 2002:160.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Huber PW. Liability: The Legal Revolution and Its Consequences. New York, NY: Basic Books, 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Howard PK. The Death of Common Sense. New York, NY: Warner Books, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Common Good. Common Good Petition. Website: http://cgood.org. Accessed: 12/5/03.

  9. Crier C. The Case Against Lawyers. Broadway Books, 2003.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Center for Legal Policy. Trial Lawyers Inc. Manhattan Institute, 2003:31.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Bagin G. Medical Malpractice Verdict and Settlement Study Released. Horsham, PA: Jury Verdict Research, 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Jury Verdict Research. 2001 Current Award Trends in Personal Injury, 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Tillinghast-Towers Perrin. US Tort Costs: 2002 Update, 2003.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Model’s jury award top verdict. Lawyers Weekly USA 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Record Tobacco Verdict Tops Year’s Large Awards. Lawyers Weekly USA, 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  16. The Doctors Company data on file. Napa, CA 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Hunter JR, Doroshow J. Premium Deceit-The Failure of “Tort Reform” to Cut Insurance Prices. New York: Center for Justice & Democracy, 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Nace BJ, Stewart LS. Straight Talk on Medical Malpractice: American Trial Lawyers Association, 1994:20.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Conning Research & Consulting I. Medical Malpractice: Anatomy of a Crisis 2003, 2003.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Hurley JD. A new crisis for the Med Mal market? Emphasis (Tillinghast), 2002: 4;2–5.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Ramachandran R. Did Investments Affect Medical Malpractice Premiums?: Brown Brothers Harriman Insurance Asset Management Group, 2003.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Governor’s Select Task Force. Governor’s Select Task Force on Healthcare Professional Liability Insurance. Orlando, FL: University of Central Florida, 2003.

    Google Scholar 

  23. United States General Accounting Office. Medical Malpractice Insurance: Multiple Factors Have Contributed to Increased Premium Rates. Washington, DC, 2003:67.

    Google Scholar 

  24. American Tort Reform Association. ATRA’s Tort Reform Record, 2003.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Weiler PC, Hiatt HH, Newhouse JP, Johnson WG, Brennan TA, Leape LL. A Measure of Malpractice. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Brennan TA, Sox CM, Burstin HR. Relation between negligent adverse events in the outcomes of medical malpractice litigation. N Engl J Med 1996:335; 1963–1967.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Anderson R. Defending the Practice of Medicine. Arch Intern Med 2003, 164.

    Google Scholar 

  28. National Association of Insurance Commissioners. Medical Malpractice Insurance: A Study of Market Conditions, 2003, pp. 28, 34.

    Google Scholar 

  29. NAIC. National Association of Insurance Commissioners 1999 Profitability Study, 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Texas Department of Insurance. Medical Malpractice Insurance: Overview and Discussion, 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Hamm WG. An Analysis of Harvey Rosenfield’s Report: “California’s MICRA”: LECG, 1997, p. 1–25.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Biondi RS, Quintilian K. Medical Liability Mutual Insurance Company Projected Effect on New York Professional Liability Costs of Capping Noneconomic Damages: Milliman & Robertson, 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  33. American Academy of Actuaries. Medical Malpractice Reform in California, Ohio and New York. Contingencies, 1995, pp. 22–25.

    Google Scholar 

  34. US Congress Office of Technology Assessment. Impact of legal reforms on medical malpractice costs. Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office, 1995:64.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Keene B. California’s medical malpractice crisis: Health Care Liability Alliance, 2003, pp. 1–13.

    Google Scholar 

  36. American Academy of Actuaries. Medical Malpractice Tort Reform: Lessons from the States, 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Excerpts of Reports Received by the American Tort Reform Association on the Crisis in Medical Liability: American Medical Association, 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  38. Oregon Med Mal 1996–2001 ($000s). Sheshunoff Info Services: NW Physicians Mutual Insurance Company, 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  39. Medical Liability Monitor. Trends in 2002 Rates for Physicians’ Medical Professional Liability Insurance. Chicago, 2002:1–16.

    Google Scholar 

  40. Congressional Budget Office. Cost Estimate for HEALTH Act of 2002, 2002, pp. 1–10.

    Google Scholar 

  41. Milliman USA. Milliman USA Analysis Sees Savings for Professional Medical Malpractice Costs. New York, NY, 2003.

    Google Scholar 

  42. Charles SC, Wilbert JR, Franke KJ. Sued and non-sued physicians’ self-reported reactions to malpractice litigation. Am J Psychiatry 1985:142;437–440.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  43. Anderson R. Billions for defense: the pervasive nature of defensive medicine. Arch Intern Med 1999; 159:2399–2402.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  44. Schneider E, Epstein A. Influence of cardiac-surgery performance reports on referral practices and access to care. A survey of cardiovascular specialists. N Engl J Med 1997;335:251–256.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Kessler DP, McClellan M. Do doctors practice defensive medicine? QJ Econ 1996:111;353–390.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. American Medical Association. Medical students not immune to nation’s medical liability crisis. AMA Website 2003.

    Google Scholar 

  47. Hellinger F, Encinosa W. The Impact of State Laws Limiting Malpractice Awards on the Geographic Distribution of Physicians: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, US Department of Health and Human Services, 2003.

    Google Scholar 

  48. Health Coalition on Liability and Access. The Health Care Liability System Bars Access to Health Care, 2003.

    Google Scholar 

  49. Hamm WG. How the MICRA Cap Influences Health Care Costs for Safety Net Providers and Medi-Cal: LECG, 1999; 1–13.

    Google Scholar 

  50. Health Coalition on Liability and Access. Americans Believe Access to Health Care Threatened by Medical Liability Crisis. Washington, DC, 2003.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2005 Humana Press Inc., Totowa, NJ

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Anderson, R.E. (2005). The Case for Legal Reform. In: Anderson, R.E. (eds) Medical Malpractice. Humana Press. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-59259-845-8_15

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-59259-845-8_15

  • Publisher Name: Humana Press

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-58829-389-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-59259-845-8

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics