This Note addresses the impact of Florida’s Patients’ Right to Know About Adverse Medical Incidents (commonly known as Amendment 7) on the peer review process and the quality of healthcare in Florida. Enacted in 2004 as an amendment to the Florida Constitution, Amendment 7 provides citizens access to records and reports of past adverse medical incidents involving doctors, hospitals, and healthcare providers. Critics of Amendment 7 argue that peer review privilege protections are necessary to maintain high-quality healthcare in Florida, pointing to the need to encourage candid and vigorous evaluations by physicians of their colleagues. In contrast, Amendment 7 supporters argue that it provides Florida patients with valuable information to aid in their choice of physicians.
April 2014, Vol. 66, No. 2
Sergio J. Campos, Class Actions and Justiciability
Andrew Guthrie Ferguson, Constitutional Culpability: Questioning the New Exclusionary Rules
Alberto R. Gonzales & Amy L. Moore, No Right at All: Putting Consular Notification in its Rightful Place After Medellin
Kevin J. Lynch, The Lock-in Effect of Preliminary Injunctions
Anne R. Traum, Using Outcomes to Reframe Guilty Plea Adjudication
Stephen E. Ludovici, Rule 60(b)(4): When the Courts of Limited Jurisdiction Yield to Finality