Male and Female Recoveries in Medical Malpractice Cases

By Simmons, Walter; Emanuele, Rosemarie | Review of Social Economy, March 2004 | Go to article overview
Save to active project

Male and Female Recoveries in Medical Malpractice Cases


Simmons, Walter, Emanuele, Rosemarie, Review of Social Economy


Abstract This study analyzes male and female recovery resulting from medical malpractice injuries to discern the importance to the recovery differential of gender differences in recoveries for medical malpractice injuries. We find that the pattern of recoveries follows one similar to that found in studying wage differentials between males and females. Differences in the relative magnitudes of foregone earnings and nonmarket loses are reflected in the composition of recoveries. In addition, we find a recovery gap in which females receive substantially less in recoveries when they receive male's average compensation for medical malpractice injuries. However, only a small portion of the male and female recovery differential is explained by the characteristics of the claims, leaving a substantial portion of the differential unexplained.

Keywords: malpractice, litigation, recoveries, decomposition

INTRODUCTION

The growth in the number and size of medical malpractice claims has been a major public policy issue for almost thirty years. Concern over the issue led to two national malpractice insurance crises in the mid 1970s and 1980s, and a variety of tort reforms. The legislative reforms, which were enacted in all 50 states and the District of Columbia, addressed a variety of problems such as, alternative dispute resolution mechanisms, certificates of merit, limits on attorney fees, public access to National Practitioner Data Bank information on repeat offenders, collateral source offsets, periodic payment of awards, limits on damage awards, use of clinical practice guidelines, and enterprise liability. Medical malpractice litigation has become one of the largest components of the tort system and is widely held responsible in part for the high cost of health care both because its expense is passed along directly in insurance rates and because it compels physicians to practice costly defensive medicine (Harvard Medical Practice Study 1991).

There is now a substantial body of work that evaluates the effects of tort reform legislation and other variables on medical malpractice legislation. Danzon (1984, 1986) analyzed the contributions of various factors, including tort reform laws, to changes in the frequency and severity of malpractice claims over time and across states. Sloan et al. (1989) used malpractice cases throughout the United States to analyze the effects of various tort reform laws on the probability that there will be a recovery, the amount of the recovery, and the time required for a claim to be resolved. Coyte et al. (1991) studied the determinants of the frequency and severity of Canadian malpractice claims. Barker (1992) used statewide data to analyze the effect of tort reforms on the relative price of malpractice insurance. Farber and White (1991), analyzing malpractice claims against a single hospital, found that the quality of medical care was important in determining malpractice liability, whether there is a recovery and, if so, the amount paid. Bovbjerg (1989) provides a useful survey of all types of legislation that have affected medical malpractice; laws concerning insurance regulation, the quality of medical care, and tort reform.

Despite the enormous public and legislative interest about medical malpractice claims, developments in legal doctrines and legal procedures have not been able to comprehensively address the variety of medical malpractice problems. Research on the connection between negligent medical care and legal liability is essential in improving equitable fault determination and standards. There are several commonly held beliefs about the current legal processes relating to medical liability and malpractice. One theory proposes that lay juries are not capable of fact-finding in complicated medical cases. Another speculates that procedural rules and requirements for establishing legal causation are overly complex and do not include the scientific methodology necessary for accurate determination of medical causation, while yet another says that the legal process does not effectively reject merit less claims, while significant numbers of individuals injured by negligent medical care do not file claims.

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Sign up now for a free, 1-day trial and receive full access to:

  • Questia's entire collection
  • Automatic bibliography creation
  • More helpful research tools like notes, citations, and highlights
  • Ad-free environment

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
Loading One moment ...
Project items
Notes
Cite this article

Cited article

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

Cited article

Male and Female Recoveries in Medical Malpractice Cases
Settings

Settings

Typeface
Text size Smaller Larger
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

While we understand printed pages are helpful to our users, this limitation is necessary to help protect our publishers' copyrighted material and prevent its unlawful distribution. We are sorry for any inconvenience.
Full screen

matching results for page

Cited passage

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

Cited passage

Welcome to the new Questia Reader

The Questia Reader has been updated to provide you with an even better online reading experience.  It is now 100% Responsive, which means you can read our books and articles on any sized device you wish.  All of your favorite tools like notes, highlights, and citations are still here, but the way you select text has been updated to be easier to use, especially on touchscreen devices.  Here's how:

1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
2. Click or tap the last word you want to select.

OK, got it!

Thanks for trying Questia!

Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

For full access in an ad-free environment, sign up now for a FREE, 1-day trial.

Already a member? Log in now.

Are you sure you want to delete this highlight?