Medical Malpractice in the Philippines: Understanding the Legal Landscape

Like in many countries, the Philippine healthcare system is built on trust and expertise. Patients rely on medical professionals to provide care, but what happens when negligence breaks this trust?

Unlike other countries, the Philippines does not have a specific law dedicated to medical malpractice. Instead, legal remedies are scattered across various laws, some dating back decades.

Legal Basis for Medical Malpractice Cases

1. Civil Liability (Civil Code of the Philippines)

   • The Civil Code, which took effect in 1950, covers negligence under Article 1173, defining it as the failure to exercise the diligence required for a given situation.
   • This serves as the primary basis for holding healthcare providers accountable, even in the absence of a specific contract.

2. Criminal Liability (Revised Penal Code)

   • Enacted in 1930, the Revised Penal Code also applies to medical malpractice cases.
   • Article 365 covers “reckless imprudence resulting in physical injuries or homicide,” allowing for criminal charges against healthcare providers.
   • However, criminal cases require proof beyond reasonable doubt, making convictions more difficult.
   • Even if acquitted, a doctor may still be ordered to pay civil damages.

3. Administrative Sanctions (Professional Regulation Commission – PRC)

   • Patients can also file complaints with the PRC, which regulates licensed professionals.
   • Unlike civil or criminal cases, administrative penalties can result in a doctor’s license being suspended or revoked.

How Courts Determine Medical Negligence

Supreme Court rulings provide guidance on medical malpractice cases, particularly through the “reasonably prudent doctor” standard. This means a healthcare provider’s actions are assessed based on what a competent doctor in the same field would have done in a similar situation.

To win a case, a patient must prove the following four elements (De Jesus vs. Uyloan, 2022):

1. Duty of Care – A doctor-patient relationship existed, creating an obligation to provide proper care.
2. Breach of Duty – The doctor failed to meet the required standard.
3. Causation – The breach directly caused the patient’s injury.
4. Damages – The patient suffered harm as a result.

Proving these elements is challenging, as expert medical witnesses are often needed to demonstrate deviations from the standard of care (Solidum vs. People, 2014). However, the lack of available medical experts can make it difficult for patients to establish their case.

Challenges and Gaps in the System

• No dedicated medical malpractice law – This creates legal uncertainty for both patients and doctors.
• Burden of proof is on the patient – Litigation is costly and time-consuming.
• No mandatory malpractice insurance – Many patients struggle to recover compensation.

Despite these obstacles, landmark cases have shown that the Philippine legal system can hold healthcare providers accountable. In Casumpang and SJDH vs. Cortejo (2015), the Supreme Court ruled against a hospital for a fatal medication error, reinforcing the principle of institutional responsibility.

Finding Balance Between Patients’ Rights and Doctors’ Duties

Addressing medical malpractice is complex. While a dedicated law could provide clarity, it might also lead doctors to practice defensive medicine, potentially affecting healthcare quality. A balanced approach is needed—one that protects patients’ rights while ensuring doctors can perform their duties without undue fear of litigation.

Ultimately, Supreme Court rulings continue to shape the legal landscape, offering justice to victims of medical negligence and protecting those who have acted within their professional obligations.