Bedikian M
Am J Law Med. 1984 Fall;10(3):287-306.
In the 1970's, Michigan and other states were confronted with a medical malpractice crisis of astronomical proportions. The escalating number of medical malpractice lawsuits and concomitant increase in malpractice premiums for health care providers fostered a divisive climate among doctors, lawyers and patients. In response to this crisis, the Michigan legislature enacted the Medical Malpractice Arbitration Act. The Act establishes a process whereby patients may agree to arbitrate any claims rather than pursue them through the courts. Part II of this Article discusses the historical evolution of arbitration as a precursor to its establishment as a resolution modality for health care disputes. Part III describes the statutory framework of the Michigan Medical Malpractice Arbitration Act. Part IV discusses the contractual and constitutional challenges to the arbitration statute and their resolution in Morris v. Metriyakool. As the law respecting arbitration becomes less vulnerable to judicial perforation, this Author suggests that other jurisdictions treat the Michigan Medical Arbitration Program as an archetype, susceptible to replication.
20世纪70年代，密歇根州和其他州面临着一场规模巨大的医疗事故危机。医疗事故诉讼数量不断攀升，同时医疗服务提供者的医疗事故保险费也随之增加，这在医生、律师和患者之间营造了一种分裂的氛围。为应对这一危机，密歇根州立法机构颁布了《医疗事故仲裁法》。该法案确立了一个程序，患者可以同意对任何索赔进行仲裁，而不是通过法院进行追诉。本文第二部分讨论了仲裁作为医疗纠纷解决方式确立之前的历史演变。第三部分描述了《密歇根州医疗事故仲裁法》的法定框架。第四部分讨论了对仲裁法规的合同和宪法挑战，以及在莫里斯诉梅特里亚库尔案中的解决方式。随着关于仲裁的法律越来越不容易受到司法穿孔的影响，作者建议其他司法管辖区将密歇根州医疗仲裁计划视为一个原型，易于复制。
