Radiation litigation in retrospect

Most of the radiation litigation filed against the United States pursuant to the Federal Tort Claims Act has been defended by asserting federal sovereign immunity or by proving that the plaintiff's injury is unrelated to his radiation exposure. This paper reports that the second defense is best advanced by comprehensive pretrial investigation of the plaintiff's claim, which frequently results in voluntary dismissal of the legal action.     

Whither malpractice litigation?

Existing tort reform has produced moderating effects on some states, particularly California. Continued escalation of claims frequency, however, and average paid-claim costs mean that other remedies will have to be sought if the professional liability problem is to be solved. Many sources, including the American Medical Association, have proffered radical changes, but most of these changes will cost more than physicians and hospitals can afford. Therefore, the availability of additional funds will determine the next stage of reform. In the meantime, physicians must become more expert in medical staff peer review if they expect to successfully affect future developments.     

Radiation litigation: future issues

Scientists and regulators have successfully been able to control exposures to man-made ionizing radiation so that mankind has been able to enjoy its vast benefits without experiencing the significant harm which would occur from high doses. However, thousands of lawsuits have been filed claiming that low occupational levels of ionizing radiation have caused cancer and other illnesses. It will be decades before the legal system determines the rules of law which will apply to this new type of lawsuit and the effects which these cases will have upon those persons who work with sources of ionizing radiation. This article explores some of the issues which are expected to arise as these cases work their way through the courts.     

Trends in malpractice litigation.

Physicians who make mistakes are not necessarily negligent, contrary to prevailing opinion in the medical community. The article discusses the legal concepts of "standard of care" and "proximate cause." The incidence of favorable jury verdicts in those cases in which malpractice suits are litigated is quite high. The effects of insurance company policies in decisions about settlements on the incidence of claims is discussed and alternatives are suggested. The prevailing belief that a consent form with a patient''s signature on it is sufficient to prevent a malpractice suit is also discussed.     

COBIOTECH's role in biotechnology worldwide

Curious or skeptical friends often ask, “What and why is COBIOTECH? What is it doing?” After serving as president during its formative first years, I attempt here to provide information for the curious and allay concerns of the skeptics about COBIOTECH's emerging role in biotechnology internationally. For further information contact the ICSU Secretariat, 51 Bd. de Montmorency, Paris 75016, France.