IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/aph/ajpbhl/1996866863-869_1.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Liability for managed care decisions: The Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) and the uneven playing field

Author

Listed:
  • Mariner, W.K.

Abstract

As managed care organizations expand their programs of quality assurance and physician evaluation, more medical malpractice lawsuits may be brought against managed care organizations on the ground that, like hospitals, they are legally responsible for negligent corporate acts that injure patients. However, the federal Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) shields managed care organizations from liability when they are part of an employee group health plan governed by ERISA. Unlike patients with other types of insurance, patients in ERISA health plans do not have a malpractice remedy for a managed care organization's negligence. A few federal appeals churls recently recognized that ERISA plans can be vicariously liable for their physicians' medical malpractice, but only if the physician is the plan's employee or agent. Yet ERISA still prohibits negligence claims against ERISA health plans for injuries resulting from denial of plan benefits, failure to use qualified physicians, utilization review, or improper plan administration. Current managed care operations do not neatly distinguish between administering benefits and controlling quality of care. Neither should the law. ERISA should be amended to provide employees with the same remedies that patients in non-ERISA plans enjoy.

Suggested Citation

  • Mariner, W.K., 1996. "Liability for managed care decisions: The Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) and the uneven playing field," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 86(6), pages 863-869.
  • Handle: RePEc:aph:ajpbhl:1996:86:6:863-869_1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    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:aph:ajpbhl:1996:86:6:863-869_1. 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: Christopher F Baum (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.apha.org .

    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.