HEALTHCARE ISSUES 1
HealthcareLaw, Risk Management and Liability
HealthcareLaw, Risk Management and Liability
Healthcare law involves the rules and regulations that have been putin place to govern the provision of healthcare services in the healthcare industry. Liability risk entails a threat that an individual orentity will have to face the consequences of a breach of standardsregarding a product, operation, or damage. Similarly, risk managementrefers to an indefinite process that points out loss exposures,analyzes and monitors them, and develops ways to mitigate them. Inthis article, I will review the details court case of Moses H. ConeMemorial Hospital that was brought forward by Simkins in 1963, aswell as the opinion of Chief Judge (Circuit, 2017). I will give myopinion on why I perceive the hospital has failed to have anysignificant impact on the health inequalities. Also, I will discussvarious articles concerning the Basic Risk Management and EnterpriseRisk Management (ERM) that are used in evaluating Project Networks.
For this section, I will discuss the details of the case againstMoses H. Cone Memorial Hospital. This particular case served as afoundation for many court cases that are fighting racialdiscrimination when it comes to the provision of health services inAmerica. In the late1950’s going all the way to the 1960’s, therewas severe discrimination in the delivery of health services all overthe United States (Circuit, 2017). The discrimination was mostly inblack patients and physicians. The NAACP litigated a lot of courtcases in the fight against hospital discrimination in the mid-1950’sand the late 1960’s. The victory of Simkins’ case was a doorwayfor many other cases against discrimination to date.
Simkins’ case developed as a result of an earlier case that hadbeen filed by Conrad Pearson, regarding two physicians that claimedbeing denied privileges by James Walker Memorial Hospital. The FourthCircuit court in the region alongside the district court dismissedthe case. However, the Chief Justice at the time, Earl Warrendisagreed and ordered the granting of the certiorari. After a while,George Simkins a well-known and respected dentist wrote to the NAACPin an attempt to eliminate the discrimination in provisions ofprivileges at the L. Richardson Memorial Hospital (Circuit, 2017).Apparently, the district court dismissed the case, but Sobeloff theChief Justice of a regional court strived to overrule legal decisionsmade over the years, in respect to cases of discriminations inhospitals.
The argument presented in the Simkins’ case was that, Wesley aswell as Moses Cone Hospitals utilized Hill-Burton funds in otherendeavors other than the intended ones. The funds were meant to beused to secure population needs of providing hospital beds in thestate (Circuit, 2017). Moreover, the NAACP lawyers argued that theirclients had undergone various kinds of discrimination which was inviolation of two amendments that were made, the 14th as well as the5th amendments. The amendments entailed details of non-discrimination of citizens regardless of their color, race, andcreed.
Attorney General Burke Marshall was in support of theAfrican-American physicians, patients, and dentists. The federalgovernment was in agreement that the use of public funds in anydiscriminatory way was unconstitutional. Moreover, the governmentordered that the plaintiffs should be granted equal privileges likeall other white employees. The fourth circuit court Chief JusticeSobeloff encouraged his fellow colleagues to advocate the argument ofthe Attorney General. Many months passed and the ruling was handeddown, that the utilization of state-federal finances cannot beconducted in a discriminatory manner, basing the argument on the factthat millions of dollars were appropriated to handle governmentplans.
Unfortunately, the ruling that was given in the Simkins’ case waslimited to a certain point, because the American Supreme Court deniedthe writing of certiorari. Consequently, restricting the obligationof non- discrimination to those states that were within theboundaries of the fourth circuit courts. Moreover, the newlyimplemented regulations of Hill- Burton could not be applied to thosehealth centers that had already utilized their federal funds. Laterin 1963, Judge Herbert S. Boreman made a ruling that was in theirfavor claiming that he wanted to observe the corrections raised inthe Simkins’ case.
After the ruling was made, Judge Lyndon B. Johnson passed medicalcare law and civil rights that would be used in the years thatfollowed. Apparently, this granted an upper hand to the federalgovernment to deny funds to the medical institutions that were not inline with the discrimination guidelines. John Gardner, the head of anagency known as HEW, strived to encourage hospitals to accept thediscrimination guidance on the eve of passing the law. Later, as theyMedicare law was in place, more than 80 percent of the hospitalsacross all states had set up policies that were in compliance withthe discrimination guidelines.
After a thorough review of the blog “Basic Health Access” of 22ndFebruary 2013 on medical institutions, I have a reason to believethat it brings out crucial points that emanated from the Simkins’case. In the eras, the federal government actively conductedoperations to ensure that the provision of health services to thepopulation is quality (Bowman & Robert, 2013). For instance, whenyou look at the Simkins’ case, the government provided federalfunds to hospitals so that they can acquire the necessary equipmentfor provision of medical care. Similarly, in the time of uploadingthe blog, the manner in which the US Government made criticaldecisions in the health sector was closely monitored by the instituteof Medicine, which gave it the guidelines on the necessaryadjustments the health sector had an obligation to implement. It wasvery unfortunate when the institute made bad decisions, and no onestepped in to resolve them.
On the other hand, in the Simkins’ case, the NAACP showed somesignificant effort to battle with the federal government as well asthe health industry, by striving to eliminate cases of medical carediscrimination in the hospitals. Apparently, the Institute ofMedicine needs to improve their performance as the government isfunding and relying on them. Although, after the Simkin era themedicals services to all citizens got better, the hospitals of todayall bringing back discrimination in the provision of their services.The federal government and the general public need to increase theireffort to ensure that the health inequalities are eliminated forgood.
The Basic Risk Management and Enterprise Risk Management (ERM) arealmost similar. The difference is clear when comparing the approachmade in determining which is more comprehensive than other. Thestructure used in Basic Risk Management is categorized indepartments, and it mainly focuses on hazard risks. In this kind ofapproach, an organization hardly compares the risks faced with eachother to determine the overall impact they will have on it. InEnterprise Risk Management, all the risks that face an organizationare identified and asses by an executive in the top management.
One example of an approach using the Basic Risk Management is arestaurant conducting a survey that will help them understand iftheir customers are satisfied with the meals they prepare.Unfortunately, some of the customers may complain that the waiterstake long to respond to their orders since they are few (Pekkinen &Aaltonen, 2015). The restaurant can either add more servers or comeup with a self-service system for their customers. When it comes toan ERM, the same restaurant can face a threat of losing theircustomers to a new and more modernized hotel nearby (Banerjee, 2016).Apparently, they can upgrade their systems to compete with the newhotel or convince their clients that have been the pillar of thecommunity for longer, and thus they understand their needs betterthan the new hotel.
In America, the Simkins’ case founded the base for many cases ofdiscrimination in the health industry. After World War II, Americancitizens lived comfortably and proud since the world recognized thenation as a superpower. Unfortunately, many of them lived in denialof the internal problems that were plaguing them as citizens. TheSimkins’ case and other cases of discrimination helped them torealize that they needed to stand up to their government and demandfor better provision of services in the country. Troubles will alwaysbe plaguing the lives of any population of any nation, it takes theefforts of the general public and the justice organizations to curbthem as they arise as it is evident in the Simkins’ case.
Banerjee, B. (2016). Enterprise Risk Management. The MA Journal,51(3), 66-72.
Bowman, Robert C., M.D. (2013) Is the Institutes of Medicine WakingUp? Retrieved July 2015 from Basic Health Access
Circuit., U. (2017). 323 F2d 959 Simkins v. Moses H Cone MemorialHospital H a O. Openjurist.org. Retrieved 7 January 2017,fromhttp://openjurist.org/323/f2d/959/simkins-v-moses-h-cone-memorial-hospital-h-a-o
Pekkinen, L. and Aaltonen, K. (2015) Risk Management in ProjectNetworks: An Information Processing View. Technology and Investment,6, 52-62.