Medical malpractice litigation is the subject of a long-running and genuinely contested policy debate, and reasonable people disagree about its effects on the healthcare system. Supporters of the current liability system see it as a necessary check that compensates injured patients and pressures providers toward safer care; critics see it as a driver of defensive medicine and higher costs. Georgia’s 2025 tort reform law was passed against the backdrop of that debate.
How does malpractice litigation affect the healthcare system?
The effects are debated rather than settled, but the discussion usually centers on a few areas: the cost and availability of malpractice insurance for providers, the practice of defensive medicine, the price of healthcare overall, and the system’s capacity to learn from errors. Each of these is contested, with studies and advocates on different sides reaching different conclusions about how large the effects are and whether they are net positive or negative. What follows describes the arguments without endorsing a side.
What is defensive medicine?
Defensive medicine refers to clinical decisions made at least partly to reduce the risk of liability rather than purely for the patient’s benefit, such as ordering extra tests or imaging, or avoiding higher-risk patients and procedures. Those who emphasize it argue that fear of litigation leads to unnecessary care that raises costs without improving outcomes. Others counter that the extent of defensive medicine is difficult to measure, that some additional testing may be clinically reasonable, and that it is hard to separate liability-driven decisions from ordinary caution. The honest summary is that defensive medicine is real but its scale and cost are disputed.
How does litigation affect insurance and healthcare costs?
Providers carry malpractice insurance, and the cost of that coverage is influenced by the litigation environment, including the frequency and size of claims. In states with no damage caps, verdicts can be larger, which proponents of reform argue puts upward pressure on premiums and, indirectly, on the cost of care. Opponents of caps respond that premiums are driven by many factors, including insurer investment returns and broader market cycles, and that limiting recoveries shifts the cost of injuries onto patients and taxpayers rather than eliminating it. The relationship between litigation and overall healthcare costs is one of the most disputed parts of the debate.
Does malpractice litigation improve patient safety?
Here too the views diverge:
- One view: the threat of liability deters carelessness and pushes hospitals to adopt safety protocols, and litigation surfaces problems that prompt systemic change.
- Another view: litigation encourages secrecy and blame rather than open reporting, and a culture of transparency and systems-based improvement does more for safety than the fear of being sued.
Many patient-safety experts argue that the most effective improvements come from systems thinking, error reporting, and process redesign, while still recognizing that accountability plays a role.
What did Georgia’s 2025 tort reform change in this picture?
Georgia’s Senate Bill 68 reflected the reform side of this debate, aiming to make litigation outcomes more predictable. It did not reinstate a damages cap, but it changed how medical expenses are presented to juries, restricted certain damages arguments, and allowed trials to be split into separate liability and damages phases. Supporters framed these as measures to curb excessive verdicts and stabilize the litigation climate; critics viewed them as making it harder for injured patients to recover full compensation. Whether the changes achieve their stated goals is something that will become clearer over time as cases are tried under the new rules.
This article is general background and is not legal advice, and it summarizes a contested policy debate rather than advocating a position. Anyone with questions about how current Georgia law applies to a specific situation should consult an attorney licensed in Georgia.