Alternative dispute resolution (ADR) refers to a practice associated with the adoption of an alternative approach in dealing with disputes, which do not only need to result in litigations (Botes, 2015). In healthcare, this is one of the standard practices in dealing with disputes arising among patients and health providers. Some of the common forms of ADR used include mediation and arbitration, both of which seek to create an avenue from which to determine the outcomes of any given dispute (Cuollo, 2018). The idea of using ADR helps in cushioning healthcare facilities from any underlying risks of litigation, which may have a negative impact on their corporate image, as well as, their financial capabilities. The focus of this report is to examine the extensive use of ADR within the healthcare sector reflecting on some of the options that exist for healthcare facilities in dealing with disputes.
Use of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR)
Litigation as the primary means of dealing with disputes arising within the healthcare sector tends to become somewhat irrational and costly. Additionally, the time taken in dispute resolution through litigation is somewhat significant, as the parties involved tend to find themselves spending notable amounts of time in courts of law as a way of dealing with disputes. Consequently, this paves the way for the introduction of ADR to help in resolving some of these disputes without having to go through litigation. That forces health facilities, experiencing disputes, to come up with alternative approaches allowing them to deal with any notable conflicts (Rabinovich-Einy & Katsh, 2017). The following are some of the ADR techniques that health facilities utilize as part of their approaches towards dealing with any disputes that they encounter.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Mediation
The first ADR adopted by a majority of health facilities is mediation. Sohn & Bal (2012) define mediation as a process through which parties involved in a dispute tend to find a neutral third party to assist in trying to resolve the issues at hand. In healthcare, mediation is a common conflict resolution technique when dealing with disputes between health facilities and patients resulting from problems such as medical errors. Exposure of health facilities to litigation due to medical errors may be costly for the facilities, especially in cases where the facilities are found liable to the errors. Usage of mediation acts as a formidable approach to help prevent the liability claims from reaching the litigation stage in which the health facility may seek to find a third party that will resolve the dispute amicably without having to engage litigation.
The adoption of mediation as a resolution technique creates a ‘party-centered' process in which each of the parties involved in the dispute can present its interests from the conflicts. The third party serves as a neutral arbiter to help in ensuring that the parties, involved in the dispute, can reach an amicable settlement to the conflicts that they experience while avoiding the possibility of having to invoke the law. In the case where the dispute may occur between a health facility and a patient, the leading role of the third party is to ensure that both parties are engaged in a negotiation touching on the issues of contention. The negotiations may revolve around financial settlement in which the health facility may opt to settle the matter by paying for liability and damages to the patient for the medical errors.
Bible-Based Dispute Resolution
The second ADR technique adopted within the healthcare sector is the Bible-based dispute resolution. As the name suggests, Bible-based dispute resolution is an alternative resolution technique that reflects on teachings within Christianity, specifically in the Bible (Meyers, 2016). In this dispute resolution approach, one of the key aspects to note is that the professionals involved tend to invoke the concept of religion as part of ensuring that both parties would be able to deal with the issues in a somewhat effective manner. Lee, Yiu, & Cheung (2017) indicate that the adoption of the Bible-based dispute resolution helps in ensuring that both parties can create a respectful attitude towards each other as part of the dispute resolution process. Lack of a respectful attitude creates a situation where the conflicts between the parties, involved in the dispute, may escalate further, which makes it difficult to reach an amicable solution.
The Bible-based dispute resolution focuses on the idea that the parties would be expected to seek divine intervention as part of the dispute resolution process. That includes engaging in actions such as praying and engaging in a comprehensive manner with the focus being towards ensuring that both parties can meet their expected outcomes. Although health care would be considered as being inclined more towards science and nature, the idea of God and religion is rife among health professionals. Thus, this makes the Bible-based dispute resolution one of the most common and effective ADR techniques used among a significant number of health professionals around the world today.
Arbitration
The third mode common ADR technique used as part of the healthcare sector today is arbitration with the number of arbiters involved in handling matters associated with health facilities increasing significantly. Kass & Rose (2016) take note of the fact that disputes, especially between providers of health care services and the actual facilities in which they practice, are increasing due to issues such as poor pay among others. Thus, this has created the need for having to engage arbiters, who play a critical role in creating legally-binding contractual expectations between the parties involved in the dispute. Morrill (2017) argues that this is common in resolving conflicts that surround issues on the workplace environment in which health professionals operate, which helps towards increasing the efficiency of health facilities to operate and deliver. The adoption of arbitration as the preferred mode of dispute resolution depends on the agreement from both parties, who are expected to agree on an arbiter that they believe would offer a fair and just ruling on the dispute.
One of the main advantages of using an arbiter for purposes of dispute resolution is that the arbitration award for any of the parties can be enforced within a court of law (Jerry, 2017). Thus, this means that the law protects the parties involved in the arbitration process from any form of exploitation by the other party. Additionally, this also seeks to ensure that the parties involved respecting the other parties considering that this is part of their overall expectations within the confines of the law. In health care, this means that the parties engaging in the arbitration are guaranteed of a fair and just platform from which to ensure that their grievances are considered as part of the underlying dispute.
Discussion
From the ADR techniques, as identified above, it can be noted that all parties involved in a dispute are accorded primary avenues from which to present their issue resulting in the dispute before any judgment or decision is reached. Ehikhamenor, Obani, & Azodo (2017) pointed out the value of using alternative dispute resolution considering that it helps in reducing bias on any of the parties involved in the dispute, which may result in a situation where the decisions do not seem to maintain the expected outcomes. Instead, ADR techniques provide each of the parties with an equal platform from which to present their cases for further assessment to determine which of the parties is liable without having to go to a court of law.
Conclusion
In summary, alternative dispute resolution (ADR) serves as one of the functional approaches adopted in health care as a way of dealing with underlying disputes occurring within the sector. Majority of these disputes revolve around issues such as medical errors, which are likely to expose health facilities to litigation based on their liability. However, the idea of using ADR techniques helps in reducing exposure to litigation while ensuring that the facilities can deal with such disputes in a practical way. Some of the common ADR techniques used by a significant number of health facilities include mediation, Bible-based dispute resolution, and arbitration. In each of these techniques, the focus is on providing both parties with a platform from which to present facts that would support their side, which play a critical role as part of the negotiation process before the parties reach an amicable solution to the disputes.
References
Botes, M. (2015). Mediation: a perfect solution to health care disputes: feature. De Rebus , 2015 (551), 28-30.
Cuollo, E. (2018). Shock to the System: How Alternative Dispute Resolution Can Foster Change in Price-Setting of Mylan's EpiPen. Ohio St. J. on Disp. Resol. , 33 , 255.
Ehikhamenor, E. E., Obani, P. C., & Azodo, C. C. (2017). Application of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) in trauma care in a Nigerian tertiary hospital. International Journal of Medicine and Biomedical Research , 6 (2), 74-85.
Jerry, R. H. (2017). Explaining the Obvious: How Appraisals, Health Care, and More Implement ADR in the Insurance Field. Alternatives to the High Cost of Litigation , 35 (8), 115-117.
Kass, J. S., & Rose, R. V. (2016). Medical malpractice reform: historical approaches, alternative models, and communication and resolution programs. AMA journal of ethics , 18 (3), 299-310.
Lee, C. K., Yiu, T. W., & Cheung, S. O. (2017). Understanding Intention to Use Alternative Dispute Resolution in Construction Projects: Framework Based on Technology Acceptance Model. Journal of Legal Affairs and Dispute Resolution in Engineering and Construction , 10 (1), 04517021.
Meyers, M. (2016). Utilizing Alternative Dispute Resolution to Foster Comprehensive Traumatic Brain Injury Research. Cardozo J. Conflict Resol. , 18 , 905.
Morrill, C. (2017). Institutional Change through Interstitial Emergence: The Growth of Alternative Dispute Resolution in US Law, 1970-2000. Braz. J. Empirical Legal Stud. , 4 , 10.
Rabinovich-Einy, O., & Katsh, E. (2017). A New Relationship between Public and Private Dispute Resolution: Lessons from Online Dispute Resolution. Ohio St. J. on Disp. Resol. , 32 , 695.
Sohn, D. H., & Bal, B. S. (2012). Medical malpractice reform: the role of alternative dispute resolution. Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research® , 470 (5), 1370-1378.
