Why the civil litigation system is unfair to physicians?

Why the civil litigation system is unfair to physicians?

Introduction

According to some estimates, American physicians, surgeons and nurses make approximately three million mistakes every year. The vast majority of medical errors cause no short- or long-term harm to patients, but a minority proves to have an adverse effect of some kind. Some medical mistakes result from negligence on the caregiver's part. In legal terms, negligence refers to the failure of a professional to employ his or her skills effectively in a given situation. Other mistakes, however, are classed as mere "human error"--the sorts of mistakes everyone makes from time to time. The bulk of malpractice legal disputes arise from arguments over whether a medical mistake resulted from negligence or simple human error. Keeping in view the frequent cases of medical malpractice, it is important to analyze if the civil litigation system is unfair to physicians,

The Litigation

In the U.S., the main course of redress for victims of medical errors is to file a malpractice lawsuit. Patients who have been harmed by some type of medical error often file such lawsuits against the caregiver or caregivers whom they believe to be responsible. In cases such as Lehman's, in which patients die at least partly because of a medical mistake, surviving family members may file the suit (Hyman, 2002). Malpractice lawsuits typically seek some amount of monetary compensation for the patient's pain and suffering (punitive damages), along with reimbursement of the patient's medical bills, lost wages and insurance costs (compensatory damages). In some cases, litigants have received multimillion-dollar settlements from hospitals or doctors who were found guilty of malpractice. Hospitals and medical associations also suspend or fine doctors who have committed malpractice.

Supporters of malpractice suits say that such suits provide a key incentive for doctors and nurses not to make errors that could harm or even kill patients. They contend that malpractice lawsuits are an effective way to send a message to medical caregivers that carelessness and sloppiness will not be tolerated. In fact, some policy makers, including President Clinton (D), support the expansion of medical malpractice liability so that patients could sue providers of health insurance--in particular, health maintenance organizations (HMOs)--in addition to doctors and hospitals (Hyman, 2002). By making insurers susceptible to malpractice litigation, they argue, health providers will be forced to make decisions in the best interests of patients, rather than solely on the basis of minimizing costs. "The goal of a properly working liability system," says William Schwartz, a professor of medicine at the University of Southern California in Los Angeles, "is to deter future negligent behavior by showing providers that negligence can have severe economic consequences for them (Ireland, 1999)."

Others, however, say medical malpractice lawsuits have done little to improve the safety of health care. Malpractice lawsuits, they contend, have only served to deepen an ever-widening rift between patients and doctors. Malpractice suits, say opponents, neither punish doctors nor reward patients in any direct or meaningful ...