Alternative Dispute Resolution

This research paper discusses trends regarding the use of alternative dispute resolution techniques (ADR) as a means for handling claims in the health services industry, especially medical malpractice matters. In response to alarming increases in the size and incidence of medical malpractice claims, the health service industry has experimented through legislation and private contractual arrangements with various forms of ADR. The use of binding arbitration clauses is currently in favor among major health care providers such as health maintenance organizations (HMOs) as a means of limiting their liabilities. The specific results achieved by ADR have rarely met the exaggerated expectations and claims of its adherents. The use of binding arbitration does tend to serve the interests of the HMOS, but fails to do much for the medical community or the public and in fact, may fall into disfavor as public and judicial sentiment shifts away from the current tendency to enforce such clauses.

Background and development of medical and health care ADR

ADR developed in reaction to the litigation explosion of the 1970s and 1980s in product liability, medical malpractice and other areas. In the health care area, its fundamental premise is "that the traditional litigation system is inefficient and inequitable, that is, that it fails to provide a prompt redress to those interested as a result of medical neglig

. . .
anizations may also acquire enterprise liability. In Wilson v. Blue Cross of California, the utilization review department of Blue Cross refused to allow as many days of in-patient psychiatric treatment as the referring physician recommended and when the patient's death by suicide resulted, the Court found that Blue Cross could be jointly and severally liable on the theory that its actions were the proximate cause of death (Leone 9). Arbitration as ADR in medical and health care cases ADR takes many forms, some of which such as pre-trial screening panels, which have been adopted in 30 states since the 1970s and are now mandatory in 16, essentially are advisory in nature (Lowes 111). In the first generation of tort reforms passed by state legislatures in the 1970s and 1980s, the types of ADR involved were non-mandatory in the sense that while participation in the ADR device might be optional or mandatory, the state or private ADR bodies set up under these laws did not have final authority to adjudicate the rights of the parties. In Wisconsin, parties are required to submit their claims to mediation, "a voluntary, nonbinding process in which a neutral party-the mediator-works with disputants toward resolving or mitigating their
. . .

Some common words found in the essay are:
ADR ADR, HMOS Joseph, Arbitration ADR, DISPUTE RESOLUTION, Association Yuen, Reform Tort, HMOS Kaiser, Medical School, Meschievitz Wisconsin, Texas California, medical malpractice, health care, dispute resolution, binding arbitration, tort reform, alternative dispute, medical malpractice claims, alternative dispute resolution, care providers, malpractice claims, health care providers, medical health, blue cross, health maintenance organizations, medical economics 71,
Approximate Word count = 1856
Approximate Pages = 7 (250 words per page)

More Essays on Alternative Dispute Resolution