FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W140086878> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W140086878 endingPage "259" @default.
• W140086878 startingPage "241" @default.
• W140086878 abstract "Imagine that you have an eighteen-month old son who is suffering from severe pain in his back and legs, and after a consultation, the doctor insists that you are simply a neurotic, over-worded parent and sends you and your family to a psychiatrist. Upon getting a second opinion, you discover that your son has a tumour on his spine. Or, imagine that a family member receives a gall stone operation and ends up losing their pancreas, most of their stomach, small bowel and spleen. In addition, the doctor stitched through the mesenteric artery and failed to give a proper diagnosis before the operation. Your loved one dies shortly thereafter. As responses to these incidents, the doctors and hospital staff do not offer any apologies or explanations other than was just one of those things. The experience leaves you feeling angry, bitter, betrayed, and humiliated. The sad thing here is that these scenarios and post-incident reactions are based upon actual accounts reported from either the patients who were involved or their relatives. If you found yourself in one of these or an analogous situation, what would be your reaction? Would your only ambition be to get compensated and nothing else, or would you want to get some answers, accountability and perhaps the added assurance that the same thing does not happen to someone else? Some would say that in order to get these latter things, medical malpractice law needs to remain based in the tort system. However, the benefit of having the tort system play a role in medical malpractice law is not a universally held proposition as is evidenced by the following remark: A totally irresponsible legal system, driven by a small cadre of lawyers who have hit the mother lode, has produced perhaps the most dysfunctional medical-liability system in the world. Juries hand out millions of dollars not just for lost earnings but also in capricious punitive damages in which the number of zeros attached to the penalty seems to be chosen at random ... This is not a hard problem to fix. Tort reform is not rocket science ... The current system is crazy, ruinous and unfair. And it is easily changed. By lawyers. (2) This quotation presents a stark and pessimistic view of the current medical malpractice system, as well as malpractice lawyers, and should set off alarm bells in the ears of any medical malpractice lawyer in Canada, as talk of tort reform with respect to medical malpractice litigation inevitably leads to a dialogue about no-fault based compensation schemes for avoidable medical injuries. (3) Such a scheme would result in a great reduction of possible files (and therefore income) for some of these lawyers. Indeed, this is not a pleasant prospect for lawyers who practice in this area. The situations described above, however, suggest that there may be other non-economic and unselfish reasons for maintaining the current tort-based medical malpractice system. Thus the question arises: are there non-economic and non-efficiency based concerns that ought to be addressed when discussing the reformation of the current medical malpractice system? The focus of this paper will be an attempt to answer this question in the context of whether the medical malpractice system adequately addresses and achieves its torts-based goals. (4) I will first briefly discuss the basic premises of tort, negligence and medical malpractice law to establish that medical malpractice law, in its current manifestation, fits into the category of tort law. Second, I will discuss some possible goals of tort law that are relevant to medical malpractice law and attempt to assess the level of success medical malpractice law has in achieving these goals. Third, I will develop the moralist view of tort law that there is an undeniable link between tort law and morality. This discussion will explore the intangible or human element that seems to be addressed in the tort law system and will involve the idea that a patient's concern after having been subjected to negligent medical treatment go beyond the mere desire to be compensated. …" @default.
• W140086878 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W140086878 creator A5087749508 @default.
• W140086878 date "2003-01-01" @default.
• W140086878 modified "2023-09-23" @default.
• W140086878 title "Medical malpractice and the goals of tort law." @default.
• W140086878 hasPubMedId "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15600077" @default.
• W140086878 hasPublicationYear "2003" @default.
• W140086878 type Work @default.
• W140086878 sameAs 140086878 @default.
• W140086878 citedByCount "1" @default.
• W140086878 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W140086878 hasAuthorship W140086878A5087749508 @default.
• W140086878 hasConcept C111472728 @default.
• W140086878 hasConcept C122980154 @default.
• W140086878 hasConcept C136815107 @default.
• W140086878 hasConcept C138885662 @default.
• W140086878 hasConcept C140713313 @default.
• W140086878 hasConcept C15744967 @default.
• W140086878 hasConcept C17744445 @default.
• W140086878 hasConcept C199539241 @default.
• W140086878 hasConcept C200635333 @default.
• W140086878 hasConcept C2776007630 @default.
• W140086878 hasConcept C2776798817 @default.
• W140086878 hasConcept C2777834853 @default.
• W140086878 hasConcept C2778447849 @default.
• W140086878 hasConcept C41895202 @default.
• W140086878 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
• W140086878 hasConcept C77805123 @default.
• W140086878 hasConceptScore W140086878C111472728 @default.
• W140086878 hasConceptScore W140086878C122980154 @default.
• W140086878 hasConceptScore W140086878C136815107 @default.
• W140086878 hasConceptScore W140086878C138885662 @default.
• W140086878 hasConceptScore W140086878C140713313 @default.
• W140086878 hasConceptScore W140086878C15744967 @default.
• W140086878 hasConceptScore W140086878C17744445 @default.
• W140086878 hasConceptScore W140086878C199539241 @default.
• W140086878 hasConceptScore W140086878C200635333 @default.
• W140086878 hasConceptScore W140086878C2776007630 @default.
• W140086878 hasConceptScore W140086878C2776798817 @default.
• W140086878 hasConceptScore W140086878C2777834853 @default.
• W140086878 hasConceptScore W140086878C2778447849 @default.
• W140086878 hasConceptScore W140086878C41895202 @default.
• W140086878 hasConceptScore W140086878C71924100 @default.
• W140086878 hasConceptScore W140086878C77805123 @default.
• W140086878 hasLocation W1400868781 @default.
• W140086878 hasLocation W1400868782 @default.
• W140086878 hasOpenAccess W140086878 @default.
• W140086878 hasPrimaryLocation W1400868781 @default.
• W140086878 hasRelatedWork W153131342 @default.
• W140086878 hasRelatedWork W1825180232 @default.
• W140086878 hasRelatedWork W1984265343 @default.
• W140086878 hasRelatedWork W1991408226 @default.
• W140086878 hasRelatedWork W2002199104 @default.
• W140086878 hasRelatedWork W2004529974 @default.
• W140086878 hasRelatedWork W201754015 @default.
• W140086878 hasRelatedWork W2093777864 @default.
• W140086878 hasRelatedWork W213832588 @default.
• W140086878 hasRelatedWork W2182411937 @default.
• W140086878 hasRelatedWork W230418758 @default.
• W140086878 hasRelatedWork W2433306615 @default.
• W140086878 hasRelatedWork W248822092 @default.
• W140086878 hasRelatedWork W2614719009 @default.
• W140086878 hasRelatedWork W2736776486 @default.
• W140086878 hasRelatedWork W28258889 @default.
• W140086878 hasRelatedWork W2977354815 @default.
• W140086878 hasRelatedWork W83673765 @default.
• W140086878 hasRelatedWork W2356213257 @default.
• W140086878 hasRelatedWork W2558158139 @default.
• W140086878 hasVolume "11" @default.
• W140086878 isParatext "false" @default.
• W140086878 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W140086878 magId "140086878" @default.
• W140086878 workType "article" @default.