Wednesday, July 30, 2003
MEDMAL PART TWO:
Good article on the Medical Economics site evaluating how other countries handle their medical liability claims. The situation of a jury deciding a malpractice case seems to be fairly unique to the U.S. The piece goes on to discuss other factors; such as neutral experts, limiting contingency fees, and "loser pays" . The most lengthy exposition is on how a "no fault" system works in other countries. I find it interesting that in New Zeland that 10-15 percent of all cases are due to "medical error" and the rest are called "mishaps". Those claims still get paid, though. Point is also made that in other countries universal single-payor systems exist, so the plantiff and family do not carry a high financial burden providing for future care. It seems that medical liability problems are not confined to the U.S., but span the globe. |
Good article on the Medical Economics site evaluating how other countries handle their medical liability claims. The situation of a jury deciding a malpractice case seems to be fairly unique to the U.S. The piece goes on to discuss other factors; such as neutral experts, limiting contingency fees, and "loser pays" . The most lengthy exposition is on how a "no fault" system works in other countries. I find it interesting that in New Zeland that 10-15 percent of all cases are due to "medical error" and the rest are called "mishaps". Those claims still get paid, though. Point is also made that in other countries universal single-payor systems exist, so the plantiff and family do not carry a high financial burden providing for future care. It seems that medical liability problems are not confined to the U.S., but span the globe. |
