So-called 'Health Courts' Fail to Provide Adequate Protection for Those Victimized by Medical Malpractice
Attorney Jeffrey Hensley says the health courts, supported by the AMA, "are like having the fox guard the henhouse." Palm Harbor, Fla. (PRWEB) July 13, 2007 -- So-called "health courts," which would replace juries with health care professionals in medical malpractice cases, would leave malpractice victims dangerously unprotected, Attorney Jeffrey Hensley said today.
The American Medical Association (AMA) adopted principles earlier this month that favor the health courts, which would do away with peer-based juries and replace them with judges trained in medical standards.
Hensley said the notion of health courts dangerously tips the standard of justice in malpractice cases against victims who may be entitled to sizeable judgments when they are seriously harmed by poor medical care.
"There is a fox-guarding-the-henhouse quality to this idea of having medical people passing judgment in medical malpractice cases," Hensley said. "People who have suffered very serious injuries or damages as a result of medical malpractice should have little confidence in courts which are run by the very same profession that caused their injuries."
Instead, Hensley said, medical malpractice victims should have full access to a court system in which their peers consider evidence from both sides, and then determine possible damages that are based fairly on the extent of their injuries or damages.
"This is not simply a step away from reasonable medical malpractice law," Hensley said. "This is a step away from the very foundations of American justice."
So-called health courts were conceived during Brookings Institute conferences in 2002 and 2003. Besides the move to health courts, the principles adopted by the AMA urge quick resolution of claims, special training for judges, and reliance on qualified experts. The AMA also has stated its support for limits, or caps, on medical malpractice judgments.
A better way to limit malpractice judgments, Hensley said, would be to limit substandard medical treatment that results in injury or even death.
"If the AMA wants to limit the claims that get awarded in medical malpractice suits, a good place to start would be in its own backyard," Hensley said. "People have a right to expect good, professional health care and, when they don't receive it, they should have a right to reasonable financial claims."
Hensley said it is important to remember that the duty of a medical professional is not to cure, or even to guarantee a good outcome from treatment. Rather, the duty is to provide good medical care according to accepted standards in the community, or, in the case of a specialist, accepted standards in that medical specialty.
"Medicine is not an exact science, and doctors are not required to be right every time they make a diagnosis," Hensley said. "A misdiagnosis becomes malpractice, however, if the doctor fails to get a medical history, order the appropriate tests, or recognize observable symptoms of the illness." ###
Simillar Articles
|
