IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v43y1996i1p1-11.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Processing the tort deterrent signal: A qualitative study

Author

Listed:
  • Hupert, Nathaniel
  • Lawthers, Ann G.
  • Brennan, Troyen A.
  • Peterson, Lynn M.

Abstract

Medical mistakes often are responsible for patient injury and suffering, but not all such mistakes are negligent. In the United States, injured patients have recourse to legal action under the common law. The medical malpractice tort trial system is intended to provide compensation for patients who have been negligently injured and to deter future negligent acts by physicians. The deterrent function of torts largely rests on practitioners' capacity and willingness to internalize, or 'process', the lessons of tort trials. However, physicians' willingness or ability to process the tort deterrent signal, while widely assumed in much contemporary legal writing on medical malpractice, has never been empirically verified. This study is a qualitative assessment of how practicing physicians process the tort deterrent signal. We interviewed a random sample of 47 internists, surgeons, and obstetrician/gynecologists from New York State as part of the Harvard Medical Practice Study. The interviews reveal three notable findings: physicians in our sample largely define medical negligence by reference to moral qualities of the practitioner; they claim that lawyers and the legal process of tort trials lack the moral authority to guide medical practice; and finally, while they consequently reject the lessons of lawyer-dominated, confrontational tort trials, they indicate that they would respond more favorably to hospital-based, physician-led, educational quality-control measures. Based on these findings, we identify several potential impediments to the receipt and processing of the tort deterrent signal by individual physicians and we suggest that the interview results support the notion of institutional liability for medical malpractice.

Suggested Citation

  • Hupert, Nathaniel & Lawthers, Ann G. & Brennan, Troyen A. & Peterson, Lynn M., 1996. "Processing the tort deterrent signal: A qualitative study," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 43(1), pages 1-11, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:43:y:1996:i:1:p:1-11
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0277-9536(95)00314-2
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Kang, HeeChung & Hong, JaeSeok & Lee, KwangSoo & Kim, Sera, 2010. "The effects of the fraud and abuse enforcement program under the National Health Insurance program in Korea," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 95(1), pages 41-49, April.
    2. Chang-Gyu Yang & Hee-Jun Lee, 2016. "A study on the antecedents of healthcare information protection intention," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 18(2), pages 253-263, April.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:43:y:1996:i:1:p:1-11. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.