ADR in Medical Malpractice: A Comparative Analysis of ADR in Medical Malpractice in the USA, Australia and Nigeria

Cultural misconceptions about the infallibility of medical professionals left patients at the mercy of medical practitioners. Defining the roles and duties of medical practitioners, alongside patients' corresponding rights, gave patients a legal basis to seek redress for medical injuries. Medical practice problems are broadly classified worldwide as medical negligence and medical malpractice. While the epistemology of medical negligence may be civil or criminal and is well known, the adversarial court process prompts the use of alternative dispute mechanisms to resolve such cases. In more advanced climes, such as the US and Australia, most medical malpractice issues are resolved via ADR. Hence, beyond the obvious benefits of ease and speed, ADR can be argued to facilitate the healing process because of its non-contentious and private nature. In Nigeria, medical malpractice cases are either litigated through the regular court system or they are addressed by the Medical and Dental Practitioners Disciplinary Committee, which on its own exercises quasi-judicial functions that are largely inept at providing justice. Therefore, this research advocates that medical malpractice cases in Nigeria should be resolved by ADR by providing a comparative analysis of ADR in the US and Australia.