 Legal Aspects of Health CareSyed Amin Tabish
Chapter Chapter 31 in Health Care Management: Principles and Practice, 2024, pp 675-689 from Springer Abstract: Abstract Throughout its history, the medical profession has upheld autonomy and self-regulation, citing the specialized nature of medical practice and a robust code of ethics. While self-regulation remains pivotal, it now operates alongside external controls—such as licensure rules, reporting mandates, and accreditation. The convergence of both forms of regulation aims to enhance patient safety and drive continuous improvement. Healthcare, once an opaque domain, is now witnessing a shift toward transparency. Providers are increasingly expected to share information with patients and the public, including details on treatment decisions, costs, conflicts of interest, and unexpected outcomes. This move toward openness aims to enhance care quality and efficiency, fostering trust and accountability. Health care laws govern the provision of medical care and ensure patient rights, safety, and standards for medical practices. Key aspects include regulations on patient confidentiality, malpractice laws, informed consent, and the rights of patients and providers. Additionally, compliance with healthcare reforms and access to care is a critical legal consideration in the medical field. Doctors bear a legal responsibility to adhere to ethical and legal regulations in their daily practice. Even when treating patients in good faith, ignorance of the law can have adverse consequences. Not all well-intentioned actions withstand legal scrutiny. Given the rising number of legal cases filed by patients, doctors must now consider legal awareness a crucial mandate and familiarize themselves with fundamental legal aspects of medical practice. In the realm of healthcare, states not only oversee institutional and professional licensing but also mandate institutional reporting of adverse events. These requirements differ across states, as do the subsequent actions triggered by such reports. Some state agencies analyze patterns, disseminate safety data, and provide alerts and recommendations. However, evidence supporting the effectiveness of these activities in enhancing safety remains limited. Medical liability serves a dual purpose: compensating injured patients and deterring healthcare providers from delivering unreasonably unsafe care. The tort system, which holds practitioners and institutions legally accountable for negligence, imposes economic sanctions as a crucial safeguard for accountability. Addressing medical errors remains a top priority in healthcare policy. Payers, policymakers, and the public show no signs of relenting. Clinicians face pressure from within the profession to self-regulate quality and safety, while external calls for stricter oversight persist. Market forces and financial incentives will further reinforce formal regulation, emphasizing safety. Reflection within the medical profession on effectively addressing safety issues is crucial. Beyond public relations, genuine enhancements in accountability mechanisms and consistent, fair application are necessary. Embracing robust self-regulation may prevent more cumbersome and less nuanced external regulations. Date: 2024 There are no downloads for this item, see the EconPapers FAQ for hints about obtaining it. Related works: Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:spr:sprchp:978-981-97-3879-3_31 Ordering information: This item can be ordered from DOI: 10.1007/978-981-97-3879-3_31 Access Statistics for this chapter More chapters in Springer Books from Springer |
Is your work missing from RePEc? Here is how to contribute.
Questions or problems? Check the EconPapers FAQ or send mail to .
EconPapers is hosted by the
School of Business at Örebro University.