Introduction

Abstract

Abstract The crisis in the mid-1980s in the availability, affordability, and adequacy of liability insurance in the United States and to a lesser extent in Canada, and the widespread public attention that has been generated in the United States in a number of huge mass tort claims, such as the asbestos, DES, and Agent Orange litigations, have precipitated much anguished political, judicial, and academic soul-searching as to the goals and future of the tort system, especially with respect to personal injuries. While some scholars have questioned whether the perception of a so-called litigation explosion in recent years is empirically well grounded,. calls for a re examination of the tort system and its alternatives continue unabated.. In any event, the pervasiveness and cost of accidents underscore the immense importance of law and policy decisions in this area. One of every four Americans is injured each year. In 1985, million Americans were injured seriously enough to require medical attention or to restrict their activities, and 143,000 of these died from their injuries, making injuries the fourth leading cause of death in the United States.. One study estimated the cost of injuries in the United States in 1985 to be $182 billion (in 1988 dollars).. This book documents the ways in which the traditional tort regime has come underseige on a number of different fronts. While upward trends in frequency and size of claim have been less dramatic for automobile accidents than for other accidents, concerns over escalating costs of premiums-which most drivers must payhave led to questioning of various features of the tort system, as well as proposals for partial or total replacement of it by various forms of no-fault compensation schemes. Although medical misadventure is still ostensibly governed by a negligence regime, the frequency and size of both medical malpractice claims and insurance premiums have escalated dramatically in the last two decades. In turn, this escalation has led to criticisms that the tort system has induced enormously expensive forms of defensive medicine rather than cost-justified improvements in precautions. Again, as in automobile accidents, commentators have urged either major tort reforms or the replacement of tort with some form of no-fault compensation scheme.