The Lancet writes about what doctors already know (if someone can e-mail me the full-text article, I’d appreciate it):
The pressure on doctors from the malpractice liability system in the United States, Australia and United Kingdom may be limiting the quality of care they provide.The common law tort system allows patients to collect when a doctor is careless or causes injury. Daniel P. Kessler, Ph.D., Professor of Economics, Law and Policy , from the National Bureau of Economic Research and Stanford University, says doctors’ fears of legal repercussions lead to the practice of defensive medicine, based on fear of legal liability rather than patients’ best interests.
Doctors may also give treatment that is uncalled for because they are not responsible for the entire cost of care. Consequently, major changes in care may arise as a result of increases in the cost set in by lawsuits.
Researchers found negative defensive medicine and positive defensive medicine to be products of these changes in health care.
Negative defensive medicine is the lack of providing constructive care, while positive defensive medicine is a means of giving unnecessary care.
Although most doctors are insured for malpractice claims, they face other personal consequences such as a damaged reputation and lost time.
In the United States, limits on what a patient can collect have been shown to decrease the pressure doctors feel. “Investigation of the effects of these and other reforms in Australia and the UK is an important topic for continuing and future research,” says Professor Kessler.
Update:
Thanks to those who sent me the article. I go through it and post some choice points in a bit.
