Suppr超能文献

诉讼中的慢性疼痛。两者有什么关系?

Chronic pain in litigation. What is the relationship?

作者信息

Weintraub M I

机构信息

New York Medical College, Valhalla, USA.

出版信息

Neurol Clin. 1995 May;13(2):341-9.

PMID:7643829
Abstract

The legal system is often as random and capricious as the very accident itself. The present tort system is fault-based and is vulnerable to the pressures of lawyers and patients who exploit subjective symptomatology for primary and secondary gain. Jury awards for noneconomic damages have little consistency and have produced astronomic awards for subjective pain and suffering. The surge in fraudulent claims exposes the weaknesses of the current system. This article is not intended to convey the notion that all cases of CPS in litigation are fraudulent, but rather suggests that unraveling this association is a formidable task that must be done owing to the huge economic burden to society. Prospective studies are urgently needed to more accurately define the natural history of individuals with CPS in litigation.

摘要

法律制度往往和事故本身一样随机且变幻无常。当前的侵权责任制度是基于过错的,容易受到律师和患者的压力影响,他们利用主观症状谋取主要和次要利益。陪审团对非经济损害的裁决几乎没有一致性,并且对主观疼痛和痛苦做出了巨额赔偿。欺诈性索赔的激增暴露了现行制度的弱点。本文并非意在传达诉讼中所有慢性疼痛综合征(CPS)案件都是欺诈性的这一观点,而是表明理清这种关联是一项艰巨的任务,鉴于其给社会带来的巨大经济负担,这项任务必须完成。迫切需要进行前瞻性研究,以更准确地界定诉讼中患有慢性疼痛综合征的个体的自然病程。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验