Abstract
The increase of litigation against doctors in Britain has drawn attention to the serious deficiencies in the current machinery of litigation as a means of providing a remedy to the iatrogenically damaged individual; nor is the process sufficiently effective, efficient or fair. Consideration of alternative means of dealing with medical injury, as they have been developed in New Zealand and Sweden, lead to the conclusion that serious consideration should be given to the introduction in Britain of a no-fault compensation scheme despite some of its inherent deficiencies.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.