IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/jleorg/v39y2023i2p309-349..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Differential Effects of Malpractice Reform: Defensive Medicine in Obstetrics

Author

Listed:
  • Javier Cano-Urbina
  • Daniel Montanera

Abstract

Recent studies argue that different types of patients are affected differently by changes in malpractice pressure. We argue that defensive medicine causes these differential effects. Our theoretical model predicts that reduced malpractice pressure decreases health care spending among patients with good access to care, but increases spending among those with poor access. We test this theory by estimating the effects of tort reforms on birth by cesarean section. Reduced malpractice pressure through collateral source rule reform decreases C-section rates by 4.75% for mothers with timely initiation of prenatal care. On the other hand, reduced pressure through noneconomic damages caps increase C-section rates by 7.59% for mothers without timely initiation. These findings are consistent with defensive medicine. Further investigation suggests that reduced pressure improves access to care for vulnerable populations and reduces utilization among well-served consumers. These findings explain the literature’s conflicting assessments of defensive medicine, despite its practice being widespread.

Suggested Citation

  • Javier Cano-Urbina & Daniel Montanera, 2023. "The Differential Effects of Malpractice Reform: Defensive Medicine in Obstetrics," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 39(2), pages 309-349.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:jleorg:v:39:y:2023:i:2:p:309-349.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/jleo/ewab044
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    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. Lilly, Anna-Grace & Newman, Isabelle P. & Bjork-James, Sophie, 2024. "Our hands are tied: abortion bans and hesitant medicine," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 350(C).

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • I18 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health - - - Government Policy; Regulation; Public Health
    • H75 - Public Economics - - State and Local Government; Intergovernmental Relations - - - State and Local Government: Health, Education, and Welfare
    • K13 - Law and Economics - - Basic Areas of Law - - - Tort Law and Product Liability; Forensic Economics

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:oup:jleorg:v:39:y:2023:i:2:p:309-349.. 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/jleo .

    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.