Is A No Fault Regime Better Than A Negligence Rule As A Way Of Compensating The Victims Of Medical Negligence?

Is a no fault regime better than a oversight rule as a way of compensating the victims of medical examination indifferenceIntroduction This seeks to resolve whether no fault regime is better than indifference rule as a way of compensating the victims of medical disrespect . We will resolve the issue by identifying and discussing the advantages of over the another(prenominal) in relation to the desired objectives of the tort integrity , which serves as the bases of the two rulesBrief Background Fenn ,. et al (2004 ) talked of dissatisfaction expressed in many a(prenominal) br quarters about the performance of the current agreement compensating the medical victims of medical negligence in England by which patients be compensated for injuries related to their medical c are . They tell that the frame is said to be monetary valuely and time-consuming because of the need to attest fault , with the consequence that too few patients obtain payment for their losses and that in spite of this barrier to claiming , clinicians are charge of taking excessive care (`defensive medicine ) and creation unwilling to report mistakes for fear of being sued . The authors then noted that consequently , the Department of Health has proposed reforms that diminish (without removing ) fault as the primer for compensation , and allow access to `fast-track , low cost determination of eligibility and benefits for claims of relatively low value (DoH , 2003 (Fenn ,. et al , 2004 (Paraphrasing madePresumed less(prenominal) advantages of negligence rule The essay question in the epithet of this assumes a proposition that the negligence rule is less positive as compared to a no fault regime . hence we are led to find what appears to be the advantage of no fault regime or the so called strict financial obligation . But in determining whether one is better over the other , there must be a basis of comparison .

The two are actually rules under the tort right , hence there is need to relate with the target of the tort law What then is tort law and what is the declare oneself of the tort law Tort law applies where one mortal (the injurer ) causes harm to another somebody . To understand the nature and purpose of the tort law , Schaefer and Schonenberger (1999 ) referred to the negligence rules and strict liability rules as the major rules of liability used in tort law to deal with situations where one person (the injurer ) causes harm to another person (the victim . They explained that in England , France and Germany , for instance , the usual forms of liability are the comparative negligence rule and strict liability with the defence force of relative negligence , and in the US it is the comparative negligence rule , the negligence rule with the defense of contributory negligence , and strict liability with the same defense (Paraphrasing made In discussing the details of above the rules Schaefer and Schonenberger (1999cited Zweigert and Ktztz (1996 , secs . 40-43 ) who provided a rigorous of tort law in England , France and Germany and Keeton Dobbs , et al (1984 , chs 5 , 11 , 13 ) in...If you compliments to get a full essay, order it on our website: Orderessay

If you want to get a full essay, wisit our page: write my essay .