Can Caps on Jury Awards Solve the Healthcare Problem? By ...

Assume the best case: caps on jury awards lower malpractice premiums significantly, say 15 to20 percent, and as a result physicians order slightly fewer “defensive” tests, and a few physiciansin rural areas stay in business. Is it worth it? The answer is probably no, and the most importantargument against implementing caps is that it will weaken the incentive to provide high-qualitycare because physicians will have even less incentive to use the proper amount of precaution.There is no greater problem in our healthcare industry today than the quality of care, which isexemplified by the rate of medical errors that the Institute of Medicine says is responsible fornearly 100,000 deaths per year. And according to a compelling analysis by researchers atHarvard University, most persons who experience inadequate, even negligent care, fail to pursuelegal remedies.The legislative focus on caps is severely misplaced. Reforms that will improve the quality ofcare and reduce the number of medical errors are desperately required. <strong>Caps</strong> on malpractice juryawards will have relatively few benefits and will hurt those who were significantly harmed byinadequate care by limiting the amount of compensation.