Medical Liability of Healthcare Providers - Essay Example

? Medical Liability Introduction Physicians and other medical practitioners have jobs that are rewarding as well as stressful. This is particularly due to the extent of duties and responsibilities that physicians must exercise especially when providing medical care to the patients. The slightest mistake or negligence on the part of the physicians can therefore culminate to grave injuries or even a fatality. This may result into a lawsuit by the patient or even the family of the patent for medical negligence of the physician and to claim damages or compensation for the injuries sustained (Baker, 2005). Even though nobody can claim to be perfect and it is certainly rational for every physician and other medical practitioners to uphold a certain level of legal liability, the fear of medical liability has indeed forced physicians and other health care providers to perform unnecessary procedures , treatments and diagnostic tests that are often costly and non optimal in result. Study shows that the increasing liability costs, coupled with the increasing fear of physicians and other healthcare providers being sued, are the major factors that have forced majority of American healthcare providers and particularly physicians to practice defensive medicine (Koenig & Michael, 2001). Thus, ordering procedures or even unnecessary tests that are not intended to improve the patients care but to safeguard themselves against the threat of the tort system. Each year, the cost that is directly related to defensive medicine practice by physicians for example in the United States is roughly estimated to cost the health care system about $70 – $126 billion. Discussion In a society that is becoming increasingly litigious, healthcare providers and physicians have practiced their specialties under the very real threat of being drugged to court by the very patient they lender their services. For this reason, the number of litigations instituted against physicians and other healthcare providers especially those without any merit, has been a cause of alarm not to mention the billions of dollars these law suits are costing the health care system. According to research, done by Koenig & Michael (2001), in all the claims instituted against healthcare providers and physicians, 60% of liability are withdrawn, dismissed, or even dropped without payment. It is quite distressing, that the process of litigating these cases certainly cost the health care system a fortune to defend them. Statistics further shows that 90 percent of the cases that are taken to trial are concluded in favor of the physician, however each of these claims cost the health care system more than 110,000 dollars to defend (Mc Cammon, 2000). In an effort to circumvent the tort system, healthcare providers and physicians end up practicing defensive medicine as a means of guarding themselves against lawsuits associated with medical malpractices and negligence. This state of affairs has forced the healthcare providers and physicians to become excessively cautious in their provision of healthcare services to their patients. Consequently, excessive numbers of imagining services, hospital admissions, or lab tests are usually used by physicians as a shield against probable negligence accusations (Koenig, & Michael, 2001). Avoiding high-risk procedures such as that involving child delivery are some of the cited examples of physicians’ practice of defensive medicine. Whilst there is no consensus regarding the nature of the medical liability system shortcoming, the opponents of the system have descended on several major areas that taint the tort system. In the first place many policymakers, analysts, healthcare providers, and physicians have raise concerns about the medical liability system failure to mitigate medical errors. Others argue that the tort system may in fact present an obstacle in the effort of providing safety of the patience since physicians may be dissuaded from participating in an effort to study, examine and disclose the causes of medical errors that result to medical liability. The tort system has therefore caused a deep-rooted tension between the aims of patient’s safety movements’ initiatives and the malpractice system. Medical liability system is thus, a double-edged sword that creates fear of litigation, which might surely force healthcare providers and physicians to practice their professional safely, while on the other hand the individualistic and punitive approach of tort law may also seem antithetical. Medical liability is further seen by the critics of the system as a major contributing factor in the rapid increase of health care cost. Essentially, due to the fear of litigations related to healthcare malpractice, the physicians may be forced to provide services that are not medically viable. Additionally, critics of the tort system argue that increase in the litigations and certainly the compensations awarded have caused the healthcare provider’s premiums to hike thus, the shortage of healthcare providers especially in marginalized areas. Indeed the high rates of premiums of healthcare providers and particularly the physicians are forcing them to be hesitant in providing certain procedures that are highly risky, denying the patience an opportunity to access a full range of medical care (Rodwin, et al, 2006). Furthermore, the medical liability system has been cited as an inefficient system which has culminated to backlog of litigations and thus inadequately compensation of victims of medical negligence. In a study done by Mc Cammon (2000), shows that in every dollar spent on medical liability litigation, only about 22 cents is used to compensate consumers. Actually some opponents of the tort system argue that the majority of medical malpractice victims do not even seek compensation via the system and that the individuals who are in fact compensated are those who suffer injuries unrelated to medical malpractices. In an effort to improve medical liability system and patients’ safety climate, several issues must be put into consideration. These issues include; promoting open communication between the patients and healthcare providers, minimizing the prevalent of preventable injuries to patients, the health care providers should be able to access affordable insurance premiums, and lastly, there should be policies to ensure legitimate medical injuries to patients are fairly compensated. All the four issues must be addressed in unison, as addressing one among the list is not sufficient, as one cannot effectively work without the other. However it should be noted that this does not mean the medical liability should be done away with but rather they system should be designed in an objective way. According to Baker (2005), lack of effective communication between healthcare providers and patients is the most important factor that influences people’s decisions to seek legal redress, rather than actual medical negligence. Litigating medical negligence often emanate from an unpredictable fatal consequences and at times coupled with lack of healthcare provider’s empathy and an actual or sometimes perceive non disclosure of essential information. In the medical liability system, unearthing the causes of errors made in the medical procedure necessitates analysis and full disclosure thus causes the tension. Medical liability does not open avenues of communication through which patient safety can be improved. The system rather jeopardizes the safety of a patient through creation of an environment that is threatening with liability. Consequently, health care providers and physicians are very reluctant in sharing medical errors. Thus, the reluctance of the health care providers and physicians to disclose or discuss medical error become a big obstacle to the programmatic and systemic efforts to avert future medical errors. Conclusion Indeed, the fear cultivated by the medical liability system amongst health care providers and physicians has obliged them to practice defensive medicine. Consequently, ordering procedures or even unnecessary tests that are not intended to improve the patients care but rather directed on safeguarding themselves against the threat of medical liability litigations. In the practice of defensive medicine, physicians absconds high-risk procedures such as handling deliveries of babies. As if that is not enough, critics of the tort system argue that increase in the number of litigations and certainly the compensations awarded have caused the healthcare provider’s premiums to hike raising the cost of access to the full range of healthcare services and the shortage of healthcare providers especially in marginalized areas (Rodwin, et al, 2006). Actually, the tort system may present an obstacle in the effort of providing safety of the patience since physicians may be dissuaded from participating in an effort to study, examine and disclose the causes of medical errors that result translates to medical liability. In an effort to improve the tort system to eliminate the fear it create in physicians and to alleviate safety of the patients, four issues must be put into consideration. These issues include; minimizing the prevalent of preventable injuries to patients, the health care providers should be able to access affordable insurance premiums; there should be policies to ensure legitimate medical injuries to patients are fairly compensated, and lastly promoting open communication between the patients and healthcare providers. References Baker, T. (2005). The medical malpractice myth. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Koenig, T., & Michael, R. (2001). In defense of tort law.  New York: New York University Press. Mc Cammon, S. (2000). Medicine vs. Law: Medical Malpractice and Physician Countersuits. Medical Sentinel 14 (5):92-95. Rodwin, M. at al. (2006). Medical Premiums and Physicians Income: Perception of a Crisis Conflict with Empirical Evidence. 25 Health Affairs 8 (1):750-758. Read More