Question

英语高手帮帮忙！！帮我翻译一下外文，急急！！！不好意思，我已经没有财富~~

Our findings point toward two general conclusions. One is that portraits of a malpractice system that is stricken with frivolous litigation are overblown. Although one third of the claims we examined did not involve errors, most of these went unpaid. The costs of defending against them were not trivial. Nevertheless, eliminating the claims that did not involve errors would have decreased the direct system costs by no more than 13 percent (excluding close calls) to 16 percent (including close calls). In other words, disputing and paying for errors account for the lion's share of malpractice costs. A second conclusion is that the malpractice system performs reasonably well in its function of separating claims without merit from those with merit and compensating the latter. In a sense, our findings lend support to this view: three quarters of the litigation outcomes were concordant with the merits of the claim.
However, both of these general conclusions obscure several troubling aspects of the system's performance. Although the number of claims without merit that resulted in compensation was fairly small, the converse form of inaccuracy ― claims associated with error and injury that did not result in compensation ― was substantially more common. One in six claims involved errors and received no payment. The plaintiffs behind such unrequited claims must shoulder the substantial economic and noneconomic burdens that flow from preventable injury.33,34 Moreover, failure to pay claims involving error adds to a larger phenomenon of underpayment generated by the vast number of negligent injuries that never surface as claims.10,11
In addition, enthusiasm about the precision of the malpractice system must be tempered by recognition of its costs. Among the claims we examined, the average time between injury and resolution was five years, and one in three claims took six years or more to resolve. These are long periods for plaintiffs to await decisions about compensation and for defendants to endure the uncertainty, acrimony, and time away from patient care that litigation entails.
In monetary terms, the system's overhead costs are exorbitant. The combination of defense costs and standard contingency fees charged by plaintiffs' attorneys (35 percent of the indemnity payment) brought the total costs of litigating the claims in our sample to 54 percent of the compensation paid to plaintiffs. The fact that nearly 80 percent of these administrative expenses were absorbed in the resolution of claims that involved harmful errors suggests that moves to combat frivolous litigation will have a limited effect on total costs. Substantial savings depend on reforms that improve the system's efficiency in the handling of reasonable claims for compensation.

Answer 1

我们的研究结果指出两种的结论。一是受到肖像的系统,受责打轻薄诉讼被过分渲染。尽管三分之一的索赔我们检查了并没有让错误,大部分的这些就拒绝支付报酬。防御的成本都并非微不足道。不过,消除声称并没有让错误将已经降低了直接系统的成本由不超过13%(不含密切的调用)到16%(包括关闭的调用)。换句话说,辩论错误并赔偿占大部分的医疗事故成本。第二个结论是:医疗事故系统进行合理的分离功能声称没有好处的优点和补偿后者。在某种意义上,我们的研究结果支持这一观点:四分之三的诉讼的结果是和谐具有这种说法。

然而,这两种一般结论模糊系统的几个困扰方面的表现。尽管声明的数量没有好处而导致补偿的相当小的,反过来形式的不准确,误差和损伤的相关要求赔偿并没有导致更大,是普遍的。六分之一的索赔涉及错误,并没有得到付款。原告在这样的回报主张必须肩负着重大的经济和noneconomic可预防的injury.33所流动的负担,34此外,未能付给需要添加到涉及误差较大,对失业现象所产生的大量的过失伤害claims.10永不面(6)

此外,精度的热情的弊端系统必须受到对其成本。在宣称我们检查,之间的平均时间损伤和决议5年,三分之一的索赔花了六个年或更长时间才能解决的问题。这些都是长时间等待决定原告在补偿应有之义忍不确定性、辛辣、和时间离开病人保健,诉讼需要。

以货币形式,系统的治理成本过高。结合辩护费和标准由应急收费原告代理人(35%的赔偿付款)带来了总成本的诉讼中的说法我们的样品,54%的赔偿原告的。事实上,几乎80%这类管理费用都全神贯注的在解决有关有害的错误主张表明移动到战斗轻薄的诉讼将影响是有限的总成本。依靠实实在在的节省改革,提高系统的效率使用合理的索赔。

谢谢采纳