The Courts and Health Policy: Strengths and Limitations
- 1 January 1992
- journal article
- Published by Health Affairs (Project Hope) in Health Affairs
- Vol. 11 (4) , 95-110
- https://doi.org/10.1377/hlthaff.11.4.95
Abstract
In recent years the nation's courts have expanded their influence in health policy in four areas: reviewing insurers' coverage decisions, deciding the adequacy of Medicaid payment rates to hospitals and nursing homes, arbitrating hospital mergers, and assessing hospitals' tax-exempt status. The major problem with developing health policy through the courts is that the courts' focus will be the concerns of the individuals or groups involved in specific cases, not the broader implications and overall objectives of the health care system. As alternatives to litigation to resolve policy conflicts, scholars have suggested negotiation, binding arbitration, clarification of legislative language, administrative courts, contract revision, and general restructuring of the decision-making process.Keywords
This publication has 13 references indexed in Scilit:
- The adequacy of hospital reimbursement under Medicaid's Boren amendmentJournal of Legal Medicine, 1992
- Health Insurers' Assessment of Medical NecessityUniversity of Pennsylvania Law Review, 1992
- Adversarial Legalism and American GovernmentJournal of Policy Analysis and Management, 1991
- Defining Experimental Therapy — A Third-Party Payer's DilemmaNew England Journal of Medicine, 1990
- The Bounds of CharityNew England Journal of Medicine, 1990
- The Legislative Injunction: A Remedy for Unconstitutional Legislative InactionThe Yale Law Journal, 1989
- Physician ratings of appropriate indications for three procedures: theoretical indications vs indications used in practice.American Journal of Public Health, 1989
- Hospital Mergers and Antitrust: An Economic AnalysisJournal of Health Politics, Policy and Law, 1989
- Setting the Record StraightNew England Journal of Medicine, 1988
- The Forms and Limits of AdjudicationHarvard Law Review, 1978