Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 40 (2):286-300 (2012)

Abstract
American medicine has long sought to control the standard of care that physicians are expected to provide to their patients. One effort to insulate the standard of care from external interference, called a “safe harbors” approach, would enable physicians to avoid liability for malpractice if they adhered to medical practice guidelines. The idea is to eliminate the “battle of experts” and reduce defensive medicine by requiring judges and juries to accept guidelines as conclusive evidence of the standard of care. Yet current efforts to improve the guideline development process, including the use of evidence-based guidelines, are unlikely to be able to overcome the shortcomings that led a similar safe harbors initiative to fail in the early 1990s. Moreover, there is no adequate justification for conferring this degree of self-regulatory power on the medical profession
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1111/j.1748-720X.2012.00664.x
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 64,159
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

The Sticky Standard of Care.Michelle Oberman - 2017 - Hastings Center Report 47 (6):25-26.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Collective Responsibility in Health Care.Lisa H. Newton - 1982 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 7 (1):11-22.
Medical Malpractice and the Legal Standard of Care.Gary E. Jones - 1989 - Journal of Medical Humanities 10 (1):45-54.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2012-07-13

Total views
23 ( #476,523 of 2,454,850 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #449,233 of 2,454,850 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes