As doctors worry about a new law that will allow patients to file malpractice suits, the experience of countries including the United States and United Kingdom shows that nofault compensation for medical errors is the key mechanism to reduce legal actions against doctors, an academic says.
Under the nofault system proposed for the new law, the victims of medical errors would claim compensation from a fund rather than taking doctors to court.
"The process under the new law is simpler and quicker than the judicial process," Associate Professor Leuchai Sringernyuang of Mahidol University's faculty of social sciences and humanities said.
Leuchai, who has been investigating the draft bill for medical malpractice protection for several years, was speaking at a roundtable seminar titled "Patient Protection Law: Lessons Learned from Different Countries" organised by the Health Systems Research Institute.
He said the key point of medical malpractice protection was compensation for injuries or damages suffered during the treatment rather than the proof of fault.
While human errors are a factor and should be minimised, he said, "most medical errors are caused by the system, not individual negligence".
Leuchai said that in the UK, the tortbased system, which allows patients to file lawsuits against doctors for medical errors, had caused unjustifiable harm to that country's healthcare system, while also damaging the relationship between doctor and patient. Moreover, some medical workers conceal information about their medical errors to avoid being sued.
On top of that, filing a lawsuit to receive compensation is a lengthy process.
"Some patients spend more than five years in the judiciary process after filing a lawsuit against doctors seeking compensation. And then half the compensation is paid to their lawyer," he said.
Meanwhile in the US, litigation against doctors has drastically increased the cost of medical malpractice insurance.
"The price of medical malpractice insurance is unaffordable," Leuchai said.
Additionally, he said, many insurance companies were discontinuing their policies for medical malpractice in light of increasing litigation against doctors.
As a result, many doctors have left the medical professional, he said, while others have reduced their services or conduct defensive medicine as a safeguard against possible malpractice liability.
However, he said, the nofault compensation bill should ease doctors' fear of litigation, as the nofault process would focus on the proof of causation rather than the proof of fault.
He said doctors need not worry about the costs of compensating patients and should focus on improvements in the quality of medical services.