Proposition

The government should change their medical laws that benefit the patients. Since there are many, who argued against their government’s lack of care. For example,  Huang’s mother had “the district court dismissed her claim based on the Medical Association’s assessment, saying that the plaintiff did not prove that she had epilepsy. The plaintiff subsequently filed an appeal, arguing that she had provided sufficient evidence to prove that the adverse event was due to the illegal use of the intravenous fluids manufactured by the defendant hospital, but this was ignored by the district court.”(Nuannuan) She was neglected because the government went against the patient for their own benefits.

There is also the issue “Of physicians surveyed, 42% reported that they had increased defensive medical practices in the last year”(Thomas, pg 499). Defensive medical practices, also known as medical malpractice, have the highest reports, but the issue becomes why they are not doing something about it.

Although I agree that Medical malpractice should redefine its relationship, not between health, authorities, and medical institutions, but between health care providers and patients. Since “Medical malpractice carriers may play a role in supporting and encouraging physicians’ often welcoming attitude toward arbitration.” and “it is almost an article of faith among health providers that juries tend to be plaintiff-friendly in medical malpractice cases. In fact, juries tend to favor physicians in medical malpractice actions in all jurisdictions at a rate of over 70%.”(Kenneth, pg 375).

Therefore, there should have a “balance among legislative, executive, and juridical powers; the balance between the rights and obligations of health care professionals; and the balance between the courts and administrative led dispute resolution system.”(Nuannuan).  Also, Congressional action should change. “Such legislative revisionism is made more improbable by the realities of modern political life. Powerful commercial interests favor binding arbitration not only for medical malpractice, but also in many other equally or more financially sensitive contexts such as commercial, labor, or securities disputes.”(Kenneth, pg 387).