Doctors, Duties, Death and Data: A Critical Review of the Empirical Literature on Medical Malpractice and Tort Reform
Geoffrey Christopher Rapp
University of Toledo College of Law
North Illinois University Law Review, Vol. 26, No. 3, 2006
In recent years, the issue of medical malpractice has been prominent in political campaigns and state legislative sessions. A number of states - responding to a perceived medical malpractice crisis - have enacted sweeping reforms of the medical malpractice litigation process. Much of this debate, however, has been devoid of reference to hard evidence. Assertions about the existence - or absence - of a malpractice crisis are often made based on anecdotal evidence describing the experience of a particular doctor, patient, or lawyer. Similarly, policy reforms are touted without reference to their demonstrated real-world effects.
This is unfortunate. The importance of the medical malpractice debate cannot be understated. It is also surprising, given the emergence of a strong body of empirical literature on medical malpractice and tort reform, and the availability of a number of data sets applicable to questions that commonly arise in discussions of malpractice litigation and tort reform.
This paper, the Lead Article in a "Medical Malpractice: Emerging Issues & the Effects of Tort Reform" symposium held on the campus of Northern Illinois University in April, 2006, offers a critical literature review of recent work in the area in order to bring the evidence center-stage in the policy debate.
Number of Pages in PDF File: 31
Keywords: Medical Malpractice, Tort Reform, Empirical Legal Studies, TortsAccepted Paper Series
Date posted: March 14, 2008
© 2013 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
This page was processed by apollo7 in 0.344 seconds