IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ucp/jlstud/v30y2001i2p661-68.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Comments on "The Assault on Managed Care: Vicarious Liability, ERISA Preemption, and Class Actions."

Author

Listed:
  • Danzon, Patricia
  • Sloan, Frank

Abstract

Managed care organizations (MCOs), as insurance entities, should be liable under contract for inappropriate denial of coverage, whereas treatment errors should be conventional malpractice claims against physicians. Most MCOs are loose networks of independent practices that lack the requisite information or technology to improve care. Holding such MCOs vicariously liable for their physicians' negligence would lead to increased "false positive" claims and distort deterrence. Integrated MCOs already contractually assume responsibility for the negligence of their salaried physicians, which appears to be efficient. Maintaining the distinction between medical error and coverage denial requires that treatment decisions be evaluated relative to a standard of care that recognizes common MCO control strategies. Class actions against MCOs are based on the false premise that MCO cost control strategies harm patients. Charges that enrollees were led to expect more coverage than they actually received imply, if true, that HMOs should have realized supernormal profits, for which there is no evidence. Copyright 2001 by the University of Chicago.

Suggested Citation

  • Danzon, Patricia & Sloan, Frank, 2001. "Comments on "The Assault on Managed Care: Vicarious Liability, ERISA Preemption, and Class Actions."," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 30(2), pages 661-668, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:ucp:jlstud:v:30:y:2001:i:2:p:661-68
    DOI: 10.1086/342339
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/342339
    Download Restriction: Access to the online full text or PDF requires a subscription.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1086/342339?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ucp:jlstud:v:30:y:2001:i:2:p:661-68. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Journals Division (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/JLS .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.