Home

Climate Change Project

Table of Contents

Courses

Search
<< >> Up Title Contents

Medical Staff Committees

Hospital medical staff committees, especially those involved in staff credentialing decisions, exist in a legal limbo. With the exception of some hospitals in small communities that are short of physicians, the members of a hospital's medical staff are competitors. Thus, medical staff committees are groups of independent small businesspersons making decisions that affect the ability of other small businesspersons to compete with them. This is facilitated by a larger business, the hospital, that controls essential facilities, delegating critical management decisions to this group of independent contractors.

Hospital administration based on decision making by independent committees of physicians can be traced to the Joint Commission on the Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations (JCAHO). The JCAHO was originally a joint endeavor by the American Hospital Association (AHA) and the American College of Surgeons (ACS). The AHA wanted to professionalize the management of hospitals but needed the support of the physicians. The ACS could see the benefit in the professionalism of hospital management but did not want to concede to physicians the power to control the medical staff appointments process. Out of these needs and aspirations the JCAHO was born. The surgeons agreed to support efforts to reform hospital management as long as the hospital administrators agreed not to interfere with the prerogatives of the medical staff. The result was an uneasy truce between administrators and physicians on the medical staff.

Because of its basic nature as a group of competitors conspiring to set the terms of the competition, the authority of a medical staff committee is legally suspect. We concede that this view is the inverse of the prevailing opinion that medical staff committees are legally favored, except when they make biased decisions. It is important to understand the basis for turning this view on its head. If medical staff committees are legally favored unless they make biased decisions, then it should be relatively easy to establish criteria for making decisions that will avoid the biases that concern the courts. If, on the other hand, medical staff committees are inherently suspect, attempts to make their decisions legally supportable will result in ever more complicated rules and procedures, and these rules and procedures will be constantly under attack with the development of new legal theories. This has been the case, prompting the Congress to pass a law attempting to preempt legal attacks on peer review actions. (See Chapter 19.)

<< >> Up Title Contents

Law and the Physician Homepage
Copyright 1993 - NOT UPDATED

The Climate Change and Public Health Law Site
The Best on the WWW Since 1995!
Copyright as to non-public domain materials
See DR-KATE.COM for home hurricane and disaster preparation
See WWW.EPR-ART.COM for photography of southern Louisiana and Hurricane Katrina
Professor Edward P. Richards, III, JD, MPH - Webmaster

Provide Website Feedback - https://www.lsu.edu/feedback
Privacy Statement - https://www.lsu.edu/privacy
Accessibility Statement - https://www.lsu.edu/accessibility