Twerski & Cohen's Second Revolution: A Systems/Strategic Perspective

22 Pages Posted: 8 May 2000

See all articles by Lynn M. LoPucki

Lynn M. LoPucki

University of Florida Levin College of Law

Abstract

In an article published in 1992, Professors Twerski and Cohen suggested that basic principles of the law of informed consent require medical providers to tell their patients about competing providers could perform the same procedures better or more safely. In its 1996 decision in Johnson v. Kokemoor, the Supreme Court of Wisconsin cited Twerski and Cohen's article in holding a neurosurgeon liable for not telling a patient of such a competitor. As a result, Twerski and Cohen now argue, the law of informed consent now stands on the brink of a second revolution. This comment sets forth a systems/strategic analysis of Twerski and Cohen's proposal. That is, using the delivery system for coronary bypass graft surgery as an example, it describes the current system's operation, projects how the system would operate with Twerski and Cohen's proposal in place (by exploring the strategies that patients and providers would be likely to pursue), and then evaluates the two comparatively. The comment concludes that even if the proposal were adopted immediately, the resulting change would proceed at a moderate pace. Over the long run, the proposal would tend to align the interests of providers with those of their patients and work a substantial net improvement in system operation.

JEL Classification: K13, K32, L84, I18

Suggested Citation

LoPucki, Lynn M., Twerski & Cohen's Second Revolution: A Systems/Strategic Perspective. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=203490 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.203490

Lynn M. LoPucki (Contact Author)

University of Florida Levin College of Law ( email )

P.O. Box 117625
Gainesville, FL 32611-7625
United States

Do you have negative results from your research you’d like to share?

Paper statistics

Downloads
75
Abstract Views
2,473
Rank
569,600
PlumX Metrics