The AMA alternative to medical liability litigation: pros, cons, and fatal flaws

The AMA proposal for an administrative scheme to replace professional liability litigation has many positive features. It abolishes jury trial and allows administrative determination of fault, representation by appointed lawyers, and limited recovery but for a wider range of injuries during treatment. Attractive as these provisions may seem to medical providers, several of them are radical enough to ensure rejection by the courts as unconstitutional. The "total package" approach to professional liability reform is less promising than concentration on the introduction of a few key items of proven or probable efficacy. Medical providers should concentrate their limited resources on tort reform providing for "caps" on noneconomic damages (pain and suffering), an absolute statute of limitations, reversal of the collateral sources (double recovery) rule, limitations on attorneys' fees, and periodic payments, rather than lump sums, for large awards. The new TMA proposal for neurological birth injuries is discussed briefly.