The Problems When Contracts of Adhesion are Offered to Mental and Behavioral Health Providers
There are problems when contracts of adhesion are offered to mental and behavioral health providers who discover that requirements are ambiguous, misleading, ill-informed, unfair, unethical or unconscionable. When mental and behavioral health providers sign a contract of adhesion that contains voidable clauses and includes terms that are prohibitively expensive to litigate, several problems arise:
Power Imbalance: Contracts of adhesion are typically drafted by one party with significantly more power and resources, leaving the other party with little to no ability to negotiate terms. This can result in providers being forced to accept unfavorable conditions.
Voidable Clauses: Clauses that are voidable may be included to discourage providers from contesting them, knowing that even if they are legally unenforceable, the cost and effort to challenge them in court can be prohibitively high. This can lead to providers unknowingly agreeing to terms that might be harmful or unfair.
High Litigation Costs: When the cost of litigation is too high, providers may avoid pursuing legal action to challenge unjust or illegal terms. This can lead to continued exploitation or unfair treatment, as the entity drafting the contract faces little risk of being held accountable.
Financial and Emotional Burden: The financial strain of potential litigation, combined with the emotional toll of dealing with legal battles, can be overwhelming for providers. This can detract from their ability to focus on patient care and personal well-being.
Professional Risks: Providers may fear professional repercussions, such as damage to their reputation or loss of employment opportunities, if they challenge a contract. This can lead to a reluctance to assert their rights or seek legal recourse.
Reduced Quality of Care: When providers are constrained by unfair contract terms, it can impact the quality of care they are able to offer. Financial pressures or restrictive clauses can limit their ability to make patient-centered decisions.
Legal Uncertainty: Voidable clauses create a level of legal uncertainty that can complicate a provider's practice. They may be unsure of their rights and obligations, which can lead to confusion and potential legal disputes.
Exploitation and Abuse: The existence of unfair and expensive-to-litigate clauses can foster an environment where exploitation and abuse of providers is normalized. This perpetuates a cycle of unfair treatment and limits the professional autonomy of mental and behavioral health providers.
Addressing these problems requires awareness and advocacy for fair contract practices, legal reform to protect providers from exploitative terms, and access to affordable legal resources to ensure that providers can challenge unfair contracts without prohibitive costs.
DISCLAIMER and PURPOSE: This discussion document is intended for training, educational, and or research purposes only. The information contained herein is based on the data and perspectives available at the time of writing. It is subject to revision as new information and viewpoints emerge.
For more information see: https://www.mentorresearch.org/disclaimer-and-purpose