{"title":"侵权法改革建议:变革的工具箱。","authors":"R Leventhal","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Tort reform is controversial because of the need to balance cost considerations with the legitimate needs of plaintiffs who have suffered malpractice injury. In addition, proponents and opponents of the different proposals often formulate their positions based largely on anecdotal evidence and concerns of special interest groups rather than careful studies. As a result, it may be some time before malpractice reform is addressed comprehensively at the federal level, leaving the states to their own reform devices.</p>","PeriodicalId":79604,"journal":{"name":"Health care law newsletter","volume":"9 9","pages":"3-8"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1994-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Tort reform proposals: a toolbox for change.\",\"authors\":\"R Leventhal\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Tort reform is controversial because of the need to balance cost considerations with the legitimate needs of plaintiffs who have suffered malpractice injury. In addition, proponents and opponents of the different proposals often formulate their positions based largely on anecdotal evidence and concerns of special interest groups rather than careful studies. As a result, it may be some time before malpractice reform is addressed comprehensively at the federal level, leaving the states to their own reform devices.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":79604,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Health care law newsletter\",\"volume\":\"9 9\",\"pages\":\"3-8\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1994-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Health care law newsletter\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health care law newsletter","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Tort reform is controversial because of the need to balance cost considerations with the legitimate needs of plaintiffs who have suffered malpractice injury. In addition, proponents and opponents of the different proposals often formulate their positions based largely on anecdotal evidence and concerns of special interest groups rather than careful studies. As a result, it may be some time before malpractice reform is addressed comprehensively at the federal level, leaving the states to their own reform devices.