“But Vestiges Remain”: The Anomaly of Sovereign Immunity for Public Hospitals

Q3 Social Sciences Journal of Tort Law Pub Date : 2019-05-27 DOI:10.1515/jtl-2019-0007
J. White
{"title":"“But Vestiges Remain”: The Anomaly of Sovereign Immunity for Public Hospitals","authors":"J. White","doi":"10.1515/jtl-2019-0007","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Public hospitals are critical institutions in the American healthcare delivery system. Yet because they are publicly owned, they sit apart from the rest of the medical sector, enjoying in some instances immunities from suit or significant limitations on damage recovery due to their public status. In today’s environment where states have legislated carefully balanced systems regulating medical malpractice liability, the prospect of immunity provides public hospitals and their employees, additional, in many cases more stringent protection from suit. This aspect of public hospital immunity has been obscured by the variety of systems from state to state governing immunity of public entities and their employees. The attention paid the subject appears to be in inverse relationship to the significance of public hospitals in our health care system. Public hospitals provide care for large segments of the population and are particularly important providers of care for poor, urban, and un- or underinsured citizens. They are centers offering specialized care and around which specialized care providers are organized in many communities. Public hospitals are particularly associated with transplant and burn centers. In addition, they are usually the highest-level trauma care centers in the communities they support. Much of what makes public hospitals critical to their communities relates to their propensity to be centers of education and training. They are often associated with medical schools, offering clinical training opportunities to medical students and are either partners with medical schools in offering graduate medical education or sponsors of such education independently.","PeriodicalId":39054,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Tort Law","volume":"12 1","pages":"33 - 79"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-05-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1515/jtl-2019-0007","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Tort Law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/jtl-2019-0007","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract Public hospitals are critical institutions in the American healthcare delivery system. Yet because they are publicly owned, they sit apart from the rest of the medical sector, enjoying in some instances immunities from suit or significant limitations on damage recovery due to their public status. In today’s environment where states have legislated carefully balanced systems regulating medical malpractice liability, the prospect of immunity provides public hospitals and their employees, additional, in many cases more stringent protection from suit. This aspect of public hospital immunity has been obscured by the variety of systems from state to state governing immunity of public entities and their employees. The attention paid the subject appears to be in inverse relationship to the significance of public hospitals in our health care system. Public hospitals provide care for large segments of the population and are particularly important providers of care for poor, urban, and un- or underinsured citizens. They are centers offering specialized care and around which specialized care providers are organized in many communities. Public hospitals are particularly associated with transplant and burn centers. In addition, they are usually the highest-level trauma care centers in the communities they support. Much of what makes public hospitals critical to their communities relates to their propensity to be centers of education and training. They are often associated with medical schools, offering clinical training opportunities to medical students and are either partners with medical schools in offering graduate medical education or sponsors of such education independently.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
“但残留”:公立医院主权豁免的反常现象
摘要公立医院是美国医疗服务体系中的重要机构。然而,由于它们是公有的,它们与医疗部门的其他部门不同,在某些情况下享有诉讼豁免权,或因其公共身份而对损害赔偿受到重大限制。在今天的环境中,各州已经制定了严格平衡的医疗事故责任监管制度,豁免权的前景为公立医院及其员工提供了额外的保护,在许多情况下,更严格的保护。公立医院豁免的这一方面被各州管理公共实体及其雇员豁免的各种制度所掩盖。对这一主题的关注似乎与公立医院在我们医疗保健系统中的重要性成反比。公立医院为大部分人口提供护理,是为贫困、城市和未参保或参保不足的公民提供护理的特别重要的提供者。它们是提供专业护理的中心,许多社区都围绕着这些中心组织了专业护理提供者。公立医院尤其与移植和烧伤中心相关。此外,他们通常是他们所支持的社区中最高级别的创伤护理中心。公立医院对社区至关重要,这在很大程度上与它们成为教育和培训中心的倾向有关。他们通常与医学院有联系,为医学生提供临床培训机会,要么与医学院合作提供研究生医学教育,要么独立赞助此类教育。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Tort Law
Journal of Tort Law Social Sciences-Law
CiteScore
0.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
10
期刊介绍: The Journal of Tort Law aims to be the premier publisher of original articles about tort law. JTL is committed to methodological pluralism. The only peer-reviewed academic journal in the U.S. devoted to tort law, the Journal of Tort Law publishes cutting-edge scholarship in tort theory and jurisprudence from a range of interdisciplinary perspectives: comparative, doctrinal, economic, empirical, historical, philosophical, and policy-oriented. Founded by Jules Coleman (Yale) and some of the world''s most prominent tort scholars from the Harvard, Fordham, NYU, Yale, and University of Haifa law faculties, the journal is the premier source for original articles about tort law and jurisprudence.
期刊最新文献
Situating Tort Law Within a Web of Institutions: Insights for the Age of Artificial Intelligence Against Harm: Keating on the Soul of Tort Law What We Talk About When We Talk About the Duty of Care in Negligence Law: The Utah Supreme Court Sets an Example in Boynton v. Kennecott Utah Copper Liking the Intrusion Analysis in In Re Facebook Disentangling Immigration Policy From Tort Claims for Future Lost Wages
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1