POST
The term malpractice crises refer to a situation where there are a rapidly increasing medical claims resulting in malpractice. There are two main implications of this situation as follows. First, there will be no single solution to the factors that cause and result from the crisis. The general crisis will encompass a series of origins. The result would include increased claims, decreases insurer returns, and imprudent insurer decisions. Also, the strategies involved in addressing the crisis would have constrained impacts and objectives. This factor means that not all of them can possess the required efficiency in solving the factors leading to and resulting from the crisis (Abadinsky 337-338).
This implication best meets its solution in understanding the importance of noting that most of the drivers mentioned above are self-correcting thus temporary and market oriented in nature. Mello, Studdert and DesRoches state that as a policy maker, it would be best to let the market correct itself as opposed to intervening with different regulation strategies to avoid litigation. The approach means that there will always occur bad and good times in the medical profession as linked to insurance claims and premiums. Thus, market forces could help cushion rather than worsen the effects of rapidly rising costs (Mello, Studdert and DesRoches).
The second implication will be that restrictions on damages may contribute to reducing the growth in premiums and costs over time. However, it could burden the severe and genuinely needy patients in a disproportional manner. Restrictions reduce the growth and award size associated with premiums. Thus, their impacts would remain in the medium to long terms. However, their effects remain small concerning the supply of physicians (Abadinsky 320-325).
According to ATRA, the American justice system faces numerous constraints concerning reasonable liability limits. Thus, the best strategy towards such an implication would be the practical reformation towards fairness in service delivery. This move shows that rather than taking measures that discourage litigation, restrictions disproportionately burdensome patients. Thus, the design of damage programs and schedules encouraging early settlement would offer the cost control and predictability required to bring balance and control to the system (ATRA).
QUESTIONS FOR DISCUSSION
What are the effects of malpractice crises on physician supply as well as access to care delivery?
What could be the appropriate way to involve insurers, patients, doctors and legal specialists in malpractice-related liability concerns?
Works Cited
Abadinsky, Howard. Law, Courts, and Justice in America. Long Grove, IL: Waveland Press, 2014. Web.
ATRA. "Medical Liability Reform." 2007. American Tort Reform Association. Web. 1 January 2016. <http://www.atra.org/issues/medical-liability-reform>.
Mello, Michelle, et al. "Effects of a Malpractice Crisis on Specialist Supply and Patient Access to Care." November 2005. NCBI. Web. 1 January 2016. <http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1409847/>.
