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.
Stay Connected:
Sign up for the Florida Law Review Mailing List
eReader Ready:
Current Issue
Jan. 2013, Vol. 65, No. 1
Articles
David Haddock, Tonja Jacobi, & Matthew Sag, League Structure &Stadium Rent Seeking— the Role of Antitrust Revisited
Steven J. Cleveland, Resurrecting Deference to the Securities and Exchange Commission: Mark Cuban Trading on Inside information
Janai S. Nelson, The First Amendment, Equal Protection and Felon Disenfranchisement: A New Viewpoint
Sergio J. Campos, Erie as a Choice of Enforcement Defaults
Hanah Metchis Volokh, Constitutional Authority Statements in Congress
Sapna Kumar, The Accidental Agency?
Christian Turner, State Action Problems







