Med Mal News

Following the release of a new study of the validity of medical malpractice claims and the verdicts and settlements they engender, the American Medical Association (AMA) and the American Trial Lawyers Association (ATLA) have taken up their usual positions at opposite poles on the question of tort reform. The study, conducted jointly by the Harvard School of Public Health and Brigham and Women's Hospital in Boston and published in the May 11 issue of The New England Journal of Medicine, concludes that more than 90% of malpractice claims involve a severe injury; of these, a total of 63% are due to demonstrable error, while 37% occur without evidence of error.

Taking these and other statistics from the study and reading them in their own unique ways, the AMA concluded that 40% of all malpractice claims were frivolous, while the ATLA said in a press release that the study 'establishes that almost every medical malpractice suit filed in the United States has a meritorious basis and rejects claims that the civil justice system is inundated with frivolous lawsuits.' Why the discrepancy? The report did find that about 3% of claims involved no injury. These, along with the 37% of claims in which malpractice could not be established as the cause of injury, combine to make a total of 40% of the entire number of claims made ' it is these claims that the AMA deemed frivolous. However, the two professional organizations differ as to whether a deficiency of proof that injury was caused by medical malpractice is the same as a definitive showing that malpractice was not the cause of the injury.