The Adversary System: Cui Bono?
Authors: W. KEITH
Journal: Annals of Internal Medicine (1982)

Editorials1 December 1982The Adversary System: Cui Bono?W. KEITH, C. MORGAN, M.D.W. KEITHSearch for more papers by this author, C. MORGAN, M.D.Search for more papers by this authorAuthor, Article, and Disclosure Informationhttps://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-97-6-919 SectionsAboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissions ShareFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditEmail ExcerptThe article by Richman in this issue(1) provides a dispassionate and objective review of compensation for industrial disease. The question remains whether his suggestions for reform are sufficient. If not, are more radical measures needed?Despite numerous statements from various government agencies, the frequency of industrial injury and illness in the United States remains conjectural. Nonetheless, there is reason to believe that data from the Occupational Safety and Health Administration, the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, the Environmental Protection Agency, and similar agencies inevitably err on the side of exaggeration. The appropriations for these agencies depend on their...References1. RICHMAN S. Why change? A look at the present system of disability determination and worker's compensation for occupational lung disease. Ann Intern Med. 1982;97:908-14. LinkGoogle Scholar2. CROUCH S. In: JOE T, BOGOTAG A, eds. The Social Security Disability Insurance and Supplemental Security Income Programs: A series of U.S. papers. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office; 1980. Google Scholar3. MACAVOY P The economic consequences of asbestos related disease. New Haven: Yale School of Organization and Management. January 1982: 85, 86. (Working Paper No. 27, Series C, Research Program in Government Business Relations). Google Scholar4. Report of National Commission on State Workmen's Compensation Laws. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office; 1972. Google Scholar5. COLLINSON J. The Pearson Report—compromise or step towards effective and just compensation for disability. Br J Ind Med. 1979;36:263-75. MedlineGoogle Scholar6. Report by the Comptroller General to the Congress of the United States, Legislation Allows Black Lung Benefits to be Awarded without Adequate Evidence of Disability. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office; 1980. (Requests for copies should be sent to U.S. General Accounting Office, Gaithersburg, Maryland.) Google Scholar7. Report by the Comptroller General to the Congress of the United States: Legislation Authorized Benefits without Adequate Evidence of Black Lung or Disability. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office; 1982. (Requests for copies should be sent to U.S. General Accounting Office, Gaithersburg, Maryland.) Google Scholar This content is PDF only. To continue reading please click on the PDF icon. Author, Article, and Disclosure InformationAffiliations: University Hospital London, Ontario Canada PreviousarticleNextarticle Advertisement FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Metrics Cited byEmotional distress in junior house officers"Liberal" silenceShould medical students go to South Africa?Benign testicular tumoursBenign testicular tumours:: Author's replyStruggling with malpractice and medical defence subscriptionsStruggling with malpractice and medical defence subscriptionsDisability Behavior: Delayed Recovery in Employees with Work Compensable InjuriesChronic Airflow Limitation: Its Relationship to Work in Dusty OccupationsWho should determine disability?Occupational Lung Disease and CompensationJAMES P. KEOGH, M.D.Compensation for Occupational Lung DiseaseMARTIN TERPLAN, M.D. 1 December 1982Volume 97, Issue 6Page: 919-921KeywordsEnvironmental healthPrevention, policy, and public health ePublished: 1 December 2008 Issue Published: 1 December 1982 PDF downloadLoading ...