The ethics of capping non-economic damages to control rising healthcare costs.
OBJECTIVE
To explore from an ethical paradigm the current research in support of and opposition to imposing caps on non-economic damages as a means of addressing the healthcare crisis.


METHODS
A review of peer- and non-peer-reviewed articles primarily covering the period from 2001-2004, which addresses the rationale articulated in support of and in opposition to imposing caps on non-economic damages. The articles are sorted into sections and critiqued: rationale for imposing caps, arguments against caps, ethical paradigms impacting caps, and conclusions.


RESULTS
Provides information from the various sources. Addresses the biases that may have shaped the authors' conclusions and some of the ethical paradigms that may have impacted positions. Also demonstrates that the unbiased research seems to establish a minimal nexus between caps and the proposed impact.


CONCLUSIONS
Focus is exclusively on the US healthcare and judicial system. However, findings may still have implications outside the USA in countries that have similar tort laws for addressing private wrongs.


CONCLUSIONS
A useful source of information for graduate students in public policy or healthcare management courses, or legislators looking for a quick reference to research regarding this topic area.


CONCLUSIONS
This paper fulfills an identified resource for non-biased assessment of the problem presented and provides a critical review of the reasons articulated in support of this public policy.
Odom
Lamar
L
Our Lady of the Lake Unziversity, San Antonio, Texas, USA.
Garcia
Anthony
A
Milburn
Pamela
P
D035881:Compensation and Redress / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence*; D003363:Cost Control; D017048:Health Care Costs; D014481:United States