- Carlos Tena-Tamayo (ctena@conamed.gob.mx), national commissioner1,
- Julio Sotelo, director2
- 1 National Commission for Medical Arbitration, Mitla #250, Mexico City 03020, Mexico
- 2 National Institute of Neurology and Neurosurgery of Mexico, Insurgentes Sur #3877, Mexico City 14269
- Correspondence to: C Tena-Tamayo
- Accepted 13 April 2005
Introduction
The growing number of lawsuits against doctors seems to be related to poor personal communication, unrealistic expectations of performance, the high costs of medical attention, and better informed and more critical patients.1 2 A lucrative industry has developed around this phenomenon. In response, doctors buy expensive insurance, which seriously affects their medical practice, summarised in the concept of “defensive medicine.”3 The practice of defensive medicine includes ordering excessive diagnostic procedures and consultations to minimise the risks of being sued.4 Consequently, the cost of medical care increases, promoting resentment in patients, which in turn favours lawsuits, creating a vicious circle.5
Fear of being sued drives some doctors to additional detrimental actions, such as abandoning risky specialties; refusing to treat seriously ill patients; and using clinical records and informed consent forms as means of legal protection, rather than as medical tools.6–8 Differentiation between complications (an unintentional or adverse reaction that aggravates the original disease) and negligence (failure to exercise a reasonable degree of care) is not always simple and may be interpreted differently by the doctor and the patient or their legal adviser.9
In lawsuits, the legal counsel is confidential, and medical opinion is in some cases given by professionals whose academic background, fairness, and expertise are inadequate.10–12 Accusations are submitted through a penal court, because the sole requirement is the presumption, on the side of the claimant, that a misdeed might have been committed. Cases presented in court may take years to resolve; lawyers are hired for a long time with cumbersome financial investment for the patient and the doctor. Deplorably, …
Sign in
Article access
Article access for 1 day
Purchase this article for £20 $30 €32*
The PDF version can be downloaded as your personal record







CiteULike
Connotea
Del.icio.us
Digg
Facebook
Mendeley
Reddit
Technorati
Twitter
Stumbleupon
Rapid responses
Latest Responses
Re: Ventilator associated pneumonia
Published 30 May 2012
Re: Restless legs syndrome
Published 30 May 2012
Author's reply
Published 30 May 2012
Re: Full access to trial data holds many benefits and a few pitfalls, conference hears
Published 30 May 2012
Restless Legs Syndrome: Fact or Fiction
Published 30 May 2012
Most responses
Venous thrombosis in users of non-oral hormonal contraception: follow-up study, Denmark 2001-10 (12 responses)
Published 10 May 2012 - 23:32
The psychiatric oligarchs who medicalise normality (9 responses)
Published 2 May 2012 - 15:42
Are doctors justified in taking industrial action in defence of their pensions? No (8 responses)
Published 8 May 2012 - 12:21
Are doctors justified in taking industrial action in defence of their pensions? Yes (8 responses)
Published 8 May 2012 - 12:21
The hardest thing: admitting error (7 responses)
Published 2 May 2012 - 12:27