QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:
Home | Help | Feedback | Subscriptions | Archive | Search | Table of Contents

This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in Web of Science Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Web of Science (12) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Studdert, D. M. Articles by Brennan, T. A. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Social Bookmarking                   What's this?

The Jury Is Still In: Florida's Birth-Related Neurological Injury Compensation Plan after a Decade

Lori A. Fritz and Troyen A. Brennan
Harvard School of Public Health and Brigham and Women's Hospital

Abstract.

Florida's Birth-Related Neurological Injury Compensation Plan (NICA) is the most significant experiment with compensation for medical injury yet undertaken in the United States. As NICA enters its second decade of operation, maintaining the scheme's jurisdictional integrity has emerged as a key challenge for policy makers in Florida. We explore the relationship that has emerged between NICA and the tort system as competing avenues for families to obtain compensation for severe birth-related neurological injury. By linking NICA claims data with data on malpractice claims filed in Florida, we found a lively persistence of "bad baby" litigation despite NICA's implementation. Many families pursued claims in both fora. An explanation for these results can be traced to key features of the plan's design—primarily, the way in which "exclusive" jurisdiction over injuries is determined and the restrictive nature of the compensation criteria used. Our findings may help efforts to consolidate NICA's role in injury compensation and inform future design of alternative compensation systems.

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				P. J. Barringer, D. M. Studdert, A. B. Kachalia, and M. M. Mello Administrative Compensation of Medical Injuries: A Hardy Perennial Blooms Again Journal of Health Politics Policy and Law, August 1, 2008; 33(4): 725 - 760. [Abstract] [PDF]

				P. Davis, R. Lay-Yee, R. Briant, and A. Scott Modeling Eligibility under National Systems of Compensation for Treatment Injury Journal of Health Politics Policy and Law, April 1, 2006; 31(2): 295 - 319. [Abstract] [PDF]

				D. Marcus States' no-fault compensation programs fail to solve malpractice crisis AAP News, October 1, 2005; 26(10): 18 - 19. [Full Text]

				R. R. Bovbjerg and L. R. Tancredi Liability Reform Should Make Patients Safer: "Avoidable Classes of Events" are a Key Improvement J. Law Med. Ethics, September 1, 2005; 33(3): 478 - 500. [PDF]

				P. Davis, R. Lay-Yee, J. Fitzjohn, P. Hider, R. Briant, and S. Schug Compensation for Medical Injury in New Zealand: Does "No-Fault" Increase the Level of Claims Making and Reduce Social and Clinical Selectivity? Journal of Health Politics Policy and Law, October 1, 2002; 27(5): 833 - 854. [Abstract] [PDF]

				D. M. Studdert and T. A. Brennan No-Fault Compensation for Medical Injuries: The Prospect for Error Prevention JAMA, July 11, 2001; 286(2): 217 - 223. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]