Impact of Tort Reform on Healthcare Delivery and Litigation Costs
Introduction
The healthcare industry is a rapidly changing and dynamic field. In recent times, tort reform has been a significant development. This concept refers to the alterations made to the legal system which limit the rights of patients to take legal action against healthcare providers for malpractice. While tort reform intends to lessen the financial burden of malpractice suits, it has had some unintended effects on healthcare delivery (Gerlach et al., 2019). This discussion will examine several examples of tort reform in healthcare and evaluate how successful they have been.
Evaluation of Healthcare Tort Reform
The use of caps on damages is one of the foremost strategies for tort reform in the medical field. This entails that medical practitioners are no longer responsible for unlimited compensation when facing a malpractice lawsuit. Instead, damages are restricted to a certain level, usually determined by the extent of the harm (Sheffield, 2019). This has been demonstrated to reduce the cost of malpractice suits, as the amount of damages provided is frequently much lower than it would be without the cap.
Another form of tort reform is the introduction of alternative dispute resolution (ADR). This involves experts who review the case and compromise on a remuneration amount that is lower than the amount the individual would obtain in a regular judicial court (Chung et al., 2021). This has been successful in reducing the cost of litigation, as the settlement amounts are often much lower than what the patient would receive in a traditional court setting.
Certificate of merit laws have proven to be effective measures in preventing a large number of baseless lawsuits, as they require healthcare providers to validate their qualifications before they can be taken to court for malpractice (Childers, 2021). This has been successful in lowering the number of frivolous cases, ensuring that only those with legitimate grievances can take legal action.
Conclusion
In general, tort reform has been effective in cutting the expense of healthcare lawsuits. Limitations on remuneration have been beneficial in curtailing the amount of money that healthcare providers must pay in circumstances of medical malpractice litigation. Utilizing alternative dispute resolution has been advantageous in lowering the cost of litigation, as the compensation amounts are usually much less than what the patient would get in a usual court situation.
References
Childers, R. G. (2021). Tort reform: do details matter?. Health Economics, Policy and Law, 16(3), 308-324. Web.
Chung, S. Y., Fang, C. H., Grube, J. G., & Eloy, J. A. (2021). History of malpractice litigation in the United States. Litigation in Otolaryngology: Minimizing Liability and Preventing Adverse Outcomes, 11-19.
Gerlach, J., Abodunde, B., Sollosy, M., & Coustasse, A. (2019). Rethinking the obvious: time for new ideas on medical malpractice tort reform. The health care manager, 38(2), 109-115. Web.
Sheffield, J. C. (2019). Congress Prescribes Preemption of State Tort-Reform Laws to Remedy Healthcare Crisis: An Improper Prognosis. JL & Health, 32, 27. Web.