Medical Negligence

Text Size

Medical Negligence 

The Civil Justice System and Patient Safety

Quotables: Medical Negligence

“But studies suggest that defensive medicine creates less waste than many doctors believe — probably no more than about 3 percent of overall medical spending. And consumer advocates and lawyers say that patients injured by medical errors deserve compensation and that changes to the system should focus on promoting transparency and reducing mistakes.”
-CQ Today, Jan. 19, 2011

 

The Institute of Medicine found that up to 98,000 people die every year from preventable medical errors, which is the sixth leading cause of death. Tort reform protects negligent health providers and takes away the rights of injured patients.

On January 24, 2011, the "Help Efficient, Accessible, Low Cost, Timely, Health Care (HEALTH) Act of 2011" (H.R. 5) was introduced. H.R. 5 aims to take away the legal rights of injured patients, removing any incentives to improve patient safety, and leave people at risk for more injures from negligent care. This bill would impose one-size-fits-all caps on damages, not just when injured by medical negligence, but also defective drugs, medical devices, or abuse suffered in nursing homes. Read AAJ's statement here. 

AAJ has developed a primer on medical negligence and the role of the civil justice system. The primer can be viewed here

Background

Gibson Vance, H.R. 5: Bill Falls Short on Protecting Patients

States that Have Declared a Medical Malpractice Damage Cap Unconstitutional

How the Civil Justice System Protects Patients

Preventable Medical Errors – The Sixth Biggest Killer in America

Medical Negligence Lawsuits – Few and Far Between

The Truth About “Defensive Medicine”

The Case Againts "Health Courts"

Health Courts - An Insurer-Run Bureaucracy

Research

Malpractice a Tiny Percentage of Health Care Costs

No Correlation Between Malpractice Payouts and Insurance Premiums

AMA Data: Doctors Not Fleeing the Profession

By the Numbers – Few Doctors Responsible for Malpractice Payments

How Juries Work:  The Courtney Hill Story

In July of 2009, a Memphis jury unanimously returned a large verdict against a group of Memphis doctors. While many people considered the case a wake-up call to doctors for better patient care, others have viewed it as an excuse for government to limit jury verdicts against certain groups. Perhaps knowing the facts of this case and hearing from the jurors themselves will help those who continue to judge the case. Here then is the case of Courtney and Robert Hill.


The American Association for Justice
777 6th Street, NW, Ste 200 • Washington, DC  20001 • 800.424.2725 or 202.965.3500

© 2012 AAJ