Health Law and Policy Commons^™

The Case Against Preemption: Vaccines & Uncertainty, Mary J. Davis

Law Faculty Scholarly Articles

This article begins with a brief recap of the state of current preemption doctrine and how it governs the interaction of federal regulation of product manufacturers and state tort actions related to the actions of those manufacturers. Second, the article provides observations on how that doctrine might apply to vaccine injury litigation. Bruesewitz v. Wyeth, Inc. involves the preemptive scope of the Vaccine Act and the unique compensation system Congress created to respond to vaccine injuries. Bruesewitz was decided on February 22, 2011, and held that design defect claims are expressly preempted by the Vaccine Act. This article endeavors …

Good Medicine/Bad Medicine And The Law Of Evidence: Is There A Role For Proof Of Character, Propensity, Or Prior Bad Conduct In Medical Negligence Litigation?, 63 S.C. L. Rev. 367 (2011), Marc Ginsberg

UIC Law Open Access Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Malpractice Suits And Physician Apologies In Cancer Care, Eugene Chung, Jill R. Horwitz, John A.E. Pottow, Reshma Jagsi

Articles

Conside the following case: The patient is a 44-year-old woman who presents for radiation treatment of an isolated locoregional recurrence of breat cancer in her chest wall, 3 years after undergoing masectomy. At the time of diagnosis, she had T2N2M0 disease, with four of 15 lymph nodes involved with tumor. She received a masectomy with negative margins and appropriate chemotherapy, but none of her physicians talked to her about postmasectomy radiation therapy, which would clearly have been indicated to reduce her risk of locoregional failure and would have been expected to improve her likelihood of survival. She asks the radiation …

Medical Malpractice Mediation: Benefits Gained, Opportunities Lost, Carol B. Liebman

Faculty Scholarship

In the past decade, the United States healthcare system has begun to use mediation to facilitate communication between patients and physicians after an adverse medical event, to ease tensions among members of care-giving teams, to resolve medical malpractice claims, and to help family members and medical professionals make awesome and wrenching decisions at the end of life. Implementation of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010 will produce new controversies and increase the need for mediation. Patients, families, physicians, nurses, other healthcare professionals, and administrators will require help managing the disagreements that arise as they adapt to the …

How Much Anguish Is Enough - Baby Switching And Negligent Infliction Of Emotional Distress, 13 Depaul J. Health Care L. 255 (2010), Marc Ginsberg

UIC Law Open Access Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Informed Consent: No Longer Just What The Doctor Ordered - The Contributions Of Medical Associations And Courts To A More Patient Friendly Doctrine, 15 Mich. St. U. J. Med. & L. 17 (2010), Marc Ginsberg

UIC Law Open Access Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

What Are The Policy Implications Of Use Of Epidemiological Evidence In Mass Torts And Public Health Litigation, Christopher Ogolla

St. Thomas Law Review

The distinctions between the standards of proof employed in epidemiology and in law inform the central thesis of this paper. This analysis began by describing the role of epidemiology in mass torts and public health litigation. It later argues that because mass torts cover such a wide area, there are several problems related to epidemiology in litigation, particularly scientific uncertainty and inconsistent factual claims. Part II discusses recent cases where epidemiological evidence was raised and debated, distinguishing between vaccine-related and non-vaccine-related cases. Courts have differentiated vaccine-related cases from non-vaccine-related cases, principally because Congress enacted a vaccine act designed to compensate …

Recalibrating The Legal Risks Of Cross-Border Health Care, Nathan Cortez

Faculty Journal Articles and Book Chapters

The nascent scholarship surrounding "medical tourism" assumes, without much scrutiny, that foreign jurisdictions provide few legal remedies to patients, instead focusing on whether U.S. patients can sue in U.S. courts. This article tests that assumption by examining whether patients might recover adequate compensation not only in the United States, but in four common destinations: India, Thailand, Singapore, and Mexico. I analyze how each jurisdiction handles medical malpractice complaints and discuss the unique obstacles patients might face when navigating each of these systems. I conclude that U.S. patients will struggle to recover remotely adequate compensation in each of these jurisdictions. This …

What's All The Headache: Reform Needed To Cope With The Effects Of Concussions In Football, Erika A. Diehl

Journal of Law and Health

In order to effectively manage this public health concern, it is imperative to gain an understanding of the issues surrounding head injuries in sporting events. This Note will discuss the increasing frequency and dangers of concussions in amateur and professional football. It will suggest that athletes, schools, coaches, and doctors must become more educated on the causes and dangers of concussions in order to ensure the safety of participants. In order to do so, this Note introduces a medical overview of concussions, while briefly outlining the diagnosis, long-term effects, and management of concussions. Part III discusses the legal theories athletes …

The Supreme Court's Assault On Litigation: Why (And How) It Could Be Good For Health Law, Abigail Moncrieff

Faculty Scholarship

In recent years, the Supreme Court has narrowed or eliminated private rights of action in many legal regimes, much to the chagrin of the legal academy. That trend has had a significant impact on health law; the Court’s decisions have eliminated the private enforcement mechanism for at least four important healthcare regimes: Medicaid, employer-sponsored insurance, and medical devices. In a similar trend outside the courts, state legislatures have capped noneconomic and punitive damages for medical malpractice litigation, weakening the tort system’s deterrent capacity in those states. This Article points out that the trend of eliminating private rights of action in …

Medical Malpractice Liability Crisis Or Patient Compensation Crisis?, Kathryn Zeiler

Faculty Scholarship

Tort reform has been a hot topic among those interested in assessing whether and how well the tort system aids injured plaintiffs in achieving civil justice. The debate has been especially heated when it comes to medical malpractice liability. Until recently, rhetoric about the liability system and its relationship to insurance markets and physician supply dominated tort reform debates. While claims made by both proponents and opponents can seem intuitive, they are often unsubstantiated. In recent years, however, academics and others have acquired or created datasets to perform analyses to enhance our understanding of the relationship between the tort system …

Health Law-Informed Consent-Trust Me, I Do This All The Time: Comparative Provider Statistics And Informed Consent In Arkansas, Barrett S. Moore

University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review

No abstract provided.

Medical Device Safety Act Of 2009: Hearing Before The Subcomm. On Health Of The H. Comm. On Energy And Commerce, 111th Cong., May 12, 2009 (Statement Of David C. Vladeck, Prof. Of Law, Geo. U. L. Center), David C. Vladeck

Testimony Before Congress

I start with a brief history of the Medical Device Amendments of 1976 and explain why that history demonstrates that Congress quite clearly intended to preserve state liability law, not wipe it away. I will then turn to the Court's ruling in Riegel and address why the Court's wooden, textual approach to the Amendments -- which ignores their purpose -- led the Court to conclude, wrongly, that Congress intended the Amendments to preempt state liability claims for devices approved by FDA under the pre-market approval process. Next, I discuss the impact Riegel has had in the courts, resulting in the …

Federalization Snowballs: The Need For National Action In Medical Malpractice Reform, Abigail R. Moncrieff

Law Faculty Articles and Essays

Because tort law and healthcare regulation are traditional state functions and because medical, legal, and insurance practices are localized, legal scholars have long believed that medical malpractice falls within the states' exclusive jurisdiction and sovereignty. This conventional view fails to consider the impact that federal healthcare programs have on the states' incentives to regulate. As a result of federal financing, each state externalizes some of the costs of its malpractice policy onto the federal government. The federal government therefore needs to take charge of medical malpractice in order to fix the spillover problem created by existing federal healthcare programs.

Importantly, …

Unintended Consequences: The Primacy Of Public Trust In Vaccination, Jason L. Schwartz

Michigan Law Review First Impressions

The increasing availability of personal belief exemptions from state vaccination requirements is a growing concern among proponents of vaccination. Holding parents of non-vaccinated children liable to those they infect is among the responses proposed to maintain high vaccination rates. Even if motivated by a sincere desire to maximize the benefits of vaccination throughout society, such a step would be inadvisable, further entrenching opponents of vaccination and adding to the atmosphere of confusion and unnecessary alarm that has become increasingly common among parents of children for whom vaccination is recommended.

Challenging Personal Belief Immunization Exemptions: Considering Legal Responses, Alexandra Stewart

Michigan Law Review First Impressions

Public health agencies and citizens should employ legal approaches to hold parents accountable for refusing to vaccinate their children. The judiciary would craft an effective response to defeat the threat posed by these parents. Public-nuisance law may offer a legal mechanism to hold vaccine objectors liable for their actions.

The Problem Of Vaccination Noncompliance: Public Health Goals And The Limitations Of Tort Law, Daniel B. Rubin, Sophie Kasimow

Michigan Law Review First Impressions

Imposing tort liability on parents who fail to vaccinate their children would not serve the public health and public policy interests that drive childhood immunization efforts. The public policy goals of vaccination are to slow the spread of disease and to reduce mortality and morbidity. Our country’s public health laws already play a substantial role in furthering these goals. Although application of tort law may be an appropriate response to some of the problems that result from vaccination noncompliance, there also is a need to cultivate public understanding of the connection between individual actions and collective wellbeing. It is doubtful …

Gambling With The Health Of Others, Stephen P. Teret, Jon S. Vernick

Michigan Law Review First Impressions

The health and wellbeing of the public is, in part, a function of the behavior of individuals. When one individual’s behavior places another at a foreseeable and easily preventable risk of illness or injury, tort liability can play a valuable role in discouraging that conduct. This is true in the context of childhood immunization.

Parents Should Not Be Legally Liable For Refusing To Vaccinate Their Children, Jay Gordon

Michigan Law Review First Impressions

Should a parent who takes advantage of a personal belief exemption to avoid vaccinating a child be held liable if that child infects other people? No, because there are valid medical reasons for choosing this exemption and tracing direct transmission of these illnesses from an unvaccinated child to another person is virtually impossible.

Choices Should Have Consequences: Failure To Vaccinate, Harm To Others, And Civil Liability, Douglas S. Diekema

Michigan Law Review First Impressions

A parent’s decision not to vaccinate a child may place others at risk if the child becomes infected and exposes others to the disease. Should an individual harmed by an infection transmitted from a child whose parents chose to forgo vaccination have a negligence claim against those parents? While I do not hold a legal degree and therefore cannot speak directly to issues of law, as a physician and ethicist it seems to me that the basic elements that comprise negligence claims—harm, duty, breach of duty, and causation—are met in some cases where parents forgo vaccination.

Vindicating The Rights Of People Living With Aids Under The Alien Tort Claims Act, 40, Loy. U. Chi. L.J. 643 (2009), Margaret B. Kwoka

UIC Law Open Access Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Discretion To Follow The Law: The Collision Of Ohio's Nursing Home Bill Of Rights With Ohio's Political Subdivision Tort Liability Act, Peter Traska Elk & Elk Co., Ltd., Katherine Knouff

Journal of Law and Health

The Ohio Political Subdivision Tort Liability Act confers general immunity on political subdivisions. Therefore, government owned homes seek to avoid liability by raising the defenses provided by the Ohio Political Subdivision Tort Liability Act, despite the resident's rights under the Nursing Home Bill of Rights. The result is that residents of government owned nursing homes have inferior remedies for the tortious acts of a county home's employees. The disparate treatment meted out to residents of county owned homes opens the Political Subdivision Act to another challenge: equal protection. The law formerly recognized that government actors taking part in the marketplace …

Health Law—Negligent Credentialing And You: What Happens When Hospitals Fail To Monitor Physicians, Whitney Foster

University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review

No abstract provided.

Estimating The Effect Of Damages Caps In Medical Malpractice Cases: Evidence From Texas, David A. Hyman, Bernard Black, Charles Silver, William M. Sage

Faculty Scholarship

Using claim-level data, we estimate the effect of Texas's 2003 cap on non-economic damages on jury verdicts, post-verdict payouts, and settlements in medical malpractice cases closed during 1988–2004. For pro-plaintiff jury verdicts, the cap affects 47-percent of verdicts and reduces mean allowed non-economic damages, mean allowed verdict, and mean total payout by 73-percent, 38-percent, and 27-percent, respectively. In total, the non-econ cap reduces adjusted verdicts by $156M, but predicted payouts by only $60M. The impact on payouts is smaller because a substantial portion of the above-cap damage awards were not being paid to begin with. In cases settled without trial, …

Federalization Snowballs: The Need For National Action In Medical Malpractice Reform, Abigail Moncrieff

Faculty Scholarship

Because tort law generally and healthcare regulation specifically are traditional state functions and because medical, legal, and insurance practices are highly localized, legal scholars have long believed that medical malpractice falls within the states' exclusive jurisdiction and sovereignty. Indeed, this view is so widely held that modern legal scholarship takes it for granted. Articles on general federalism issues use medical malpractice as an easy example of a policy in which federal intervention lacks functional justification, and articles that focus on federalization of other tort reforms use medical malpractice as an easy foil, pointing out that the uniformity interest that justifies …

Mercury Rising: The Omnibus Autism Proceeding And What Families Should Know Before Rushing Out Of Vaccine Court, Gordon Shemin

American University Law Review

This Comment sheds light on the “opt-out” provision of the Vaccine Act. It namely discusses the effect of short-form petitions and their impact on subsequent civil action, by examining consequences flowing from the Omnibus Autism Proceeding. In short, it argues that the Vaccine Court erred with its decision to permit short-form petitions by overlooking that procedure’s long-term implications on vaccine plaintiffs. In addition, this Comment lays out a scenario to illustrate the potential pitfalls of a hasty exit from the OAP and offers some guidance to plaintiffs to avoid this outcome. The final part of this Comment offers some ideas …

Are Artificial Tans The New Cigarette? How Plaintiffs Can Use The Lessons Of Tobacco Litigation In Bringing Claims Against The Indoor Tanning Industry, Andrea Y. Loh

Michigan Law Review

Indoor tanning salons have grown significantly in popularity during recent years. Scientific research has revealed a strong link between skin cancer and ultraviolet light exposure from indoor tanning lamps. Despite such dangers, federal regulations place minimal restrictions on the labeling of indoor tanning lamps. Indoor tanning salons work vigorously to dispel notions of a link to skin cancer, often falsely promoting various health benefits of indoor tanning. The first lawsuit for injuries resulting from indoor tanning was recently filed against an indoor tanning salon, and other such litigation is poised to follow. This Note examines three potential tort claims against …

Defense Costs And Insurer Reserves In Medical Malpractice And Other Personal Injury Cases: Evidence From Texas, 1988-2004, Bernard Black, David A. Hyman, Charles Silver, William M. Sage

Faculty Scholarship

We study defense costs for commercially insured personal injury tort claims in Texas over 1988–2004, and insurer reserves for those costs. We rely on detailed case-level data on defense legal fees and expenses, and Texas state bar data on lawyers’ hourly rates. We study medical malpractice (“med mal”) cases in detail, and other types of cases in less detail. Controlling for payouts, real defense costs in med mal cases rise by 4.6 percent per year, roughly doubling over this period. The rate of increase is similar for legal fees and for other expenses. Real hourly rates for personal injury defense …

Dances With Elephants: Administrative Resolution Of Medical Injury Claims By Medicare Beneficiaries, Eleanor D. Kinney, William M. Sage

Faculty Scholarship

In our judgment, Hoffmann and Rowthorn's research clearly demonstrates that the QIO-based complaint review process does not provide genuine relief to beneficiaries. People who complain typically want an explanation of their bad experience, compensation for harm they may have suffered, and assurance that future experiences will be better for themselves and for others. Medicare beneficiaries, however, receive minimal information about the resolution of their complaints and no substantive relief whatsoever.

As Hoffmann and Rowthorn point out, several reform proposals are now before Congress, including moving the beneficiary complaint function from QIOs to new "Medicare Provider Review Organizations." It is not …

The Use Of Litigation Screenings In Mass Torts: A Formula For Fraud?, Lester Brickman

Articles

The article critically examines the pervasive abuse of litigation screenings in mass tort cases, revealing a system driven by financial exploitation where medical evaluations are manipulated to generate lawsuits. These screenings, often designed to produce false positives, undermine the integrity of the legal system by creating a flood of specious claims. The analysis highlights how lawyers, doctors, and screening companies exploit legal loopholes and financial incentives, leading to billions of dollars in settlements and eroding public trust in the civil justice system.