[Medical Law Insights] Thai Medical Law EP.3
- Comparative perspectives on Malpractice and Compensation
Thailand’s fault-based malpractice system stands in contrast to other countries’ approaches. In the United States, lawsuits are common but are often slow and costly, and only a fraction of patients harmed by medical errors ever receive compensation. Damages can be significant yet access justice is uneven, so in response to this some jurisdictions such as New Zealand or Sweden have adopted “no fault” compensation systems.
Under a no-fault system patients do not need to prove that a doctor was negligent. Instead, the focus is on whether an injury was caused by medical treatment and whether it was avoidable. Once this is established, compensation is paid from a central fund, often state-backed or insurance-based, rather than directly by the doctor or hospital.
What this does is provide faster access to compensation, reduce adversarial conflicts between doctors and patients and also lowers the emotional and financial burden on patients who might otherwise abandon claims.
In 2007, Thailand tried to explore a similar no-fault model, but the proposal was stalled due to concerns regarding cost, fairness, and resistance from medical and legal professionals. This highlights the difficulty of reform as while no-fault systems do promise efficiency, and broader coverage, they can be politically and financially contentious.
Cultural context also plays a role, in Western countries, malpractice litigation is often seen as an essential form of accountability. However, in South Asia, cultural respect for physicians has historically discouraged patients from suing, even in cases of negligence. These international contrasts illustrate how medical law is shaped by not only legal doctrine but also by social expectations of the doctor-patient relationship.
- Conclusion
Thailand's medical law framework shows both the strengths and limits of a fault-based approach. While patients have avenues to pursue malpractice claims, compensation remains modest and procedural hurdles can be significant. Informed consent rules underscore the importance of patient autonomy and at the same time pharmaceutical regulation shows the states’ role in preventing harm before it occurs.
By international comparisons, alternative methods like the no-fault compensations can be revealed, and even though they can expand access to justice they can bring financial and political challenges. Ultimately, medical law in both Thailand and abroad seek the same objective, which is to balance accountability for providers with fair protection for patients in an increasingly complex healthcare environment.
Author : Ali Akhundzada
.
.
Principle Law & Advisory
Get in Touch :(+66)82-856-3644
.
FB : principlelawandadvisory
.
#PrincipleLawAndAdvisory #LegalExcellence #YourLegalPartners #BusinessLaw #RealEstateLaw #HotelLaw #TechLaw #StartupLaw #ClientSuccess #MedicalLaw
โฆษณา
- ดาวน์โหลดแอปพลิเคชัน
- © 2025 Blockdit
