ABSTRACT
Studies investigating the impact of apologies and admission of responsibility for medical errors have been primarily observational, making it hard to attach a causal effect to the admission of responsibility and apologies. Second, most research on the settlement of medical malpractice cases were conducted in the US, with its particular litigation laws and culture. In this multi-jurisdictional study, we investigate the impact of apology and admission of responsibility on preferred resolution and compensation of claims. Employing a vignette design, we examine, among a sample of 327 respondents from 10 different countries, whether admission and apology by the doctor impact respondents’ preference for resolution through a civil court case, mediation or a disciplinary board, as well as preferred damages for pain and suffering. Admission and apology by the physician in the vignette did not impact respondents’ preference for settlement through a civil court case or mediation, nor did it affect the amount respondents found suitable compensation for pains and damages. We perceived the absence of an apology as particularly aggravating. Thematic analysis of open answers reveals that the impact of admission and apology differs for the three resolution modes and is often contextual and conditional. Future (vignette) studies should investigate whether different cases of medical errors yield similar results and whether more knowledgeable or experienced respondents (such as lawyers) would have other preferences and arguments.
Bijleveld, Catrien and Blažević, Margareta and van Voorst, Esther and Akkermans, Arno and Fisher, Michal and Niggeler, Coralie and others, Medical Errors: Impact of Apology and Admission on the Resolution and Compensation of Claims (May 13, 2023), Amsterdam Law Forum, 2023.
Leave a Reply