Medical malpractice in the Philippines refers to a situation where a doctor, hospital, or other healthcare provider fails to meet the accepted standard of medical care, resulting in harm to a patient. As medical procedures become increasingly complex, understanding the legal remedies and protections available to patients has never been more important.
Recently, the Supreme Court of the Philippines made a significant ruling in Que V. Philippine Heart Center, G.R. No. 268308, April 2, 2025 that sheds light on the responsibilities of doctors and the importance of informed consent.
The Case
A patient was brought to a doctor due to aneurysm in the aortic arch. The doctor advised the patient to undergo spinal CT scan, which confirmed the aneurysm, requiring an open-method surgery, and to also undergo angiogram and aortogram. Further, the doctor performed a three-vessel coronary aorta bypass surgery and told the patient’s family that an open-method surgery would be performed, depending on the latter’s condition. The doctor explained that the stenting procedure would expose the patient to the risk of death. After being informed of the risks, the patient consented to the stenting procedure.
The patient signed the Consent for Endovascular Stenting and the Consent to Operation, Administration of Anesthesia, and the Rendering of Other Medical Services.
Unfortunately, the patient did not survive.
The patient's family filed a complaint for damages, claiming medical malpractice. However, the doctor argued that he had informed the patient and his family about the risks involved in the procedure, including the risk of death.
The Court's Decision
The Supreme Court ruled that the doctor was not liable for medical malpractice as he was able to give sound medical advice and treatment to the patient. The Court emphasized that a doctor who offers proper medical advice, clearly explains the risks of a procedure, and secures proper consent from the patient is not liable for medical malpractice.
The Court held that medical malpractice is a particular form of negligence that consists in the failure of a physician or surgeon to apply to his practice of medicine that degree of care and skill which is ordinarily employed by the profession generally, under similar conditions, and in like surrounding circumstances.
Therefore, to successfully pursue such a claim, a patient must prove that the physician or surgeon either failed to do something that a reasonably prudent physician or surgeon would have done or that they did something that a reasonably prudent physician or surgeon would not have done and that the failure or action caused injury to the patient. In a lack of informed consent litigation, the plaintiff must prove the following: (1) the physician had a duty to disclose material risks; (2) the physician failed to disclose or inadequately disclosed those risks; (3) as a direct and proximate result of the failure to disclose, the patient consented to the treatment they otherwise would not have consented to; and (4) the patient was injured by the proposed treatment.
In simple terms, to establish medical malpractice, the patient must prove that the doctor failed to apply the degree of care and skill ordinarily employed by the profession generally, under similar conditions, and in like surrounding circumstances. In this case, the Court found that the doctor was not negligent and had informed the patient and his family about the material risks inherent in the procedure and had obtained proper consent.
What This Means for Patients
If you are considering a medical procedure, it is essential to understand the risks involved and to ask questions. Your doctor should clearly explain the procedure, the potential risks, and the benefits. You should also be aware of your rights and responsibilities as a patient.
What This Means for Doctors
Doctors have a duty to disclose material risks to their patients and to obtain informed consent. By doing so, they can minimize the risk of medical malpractice claims and ensure that their patients are fully informed and empowered to make decisions about their care.
Conclusion
The Supreme Court's ruling highlights the importance of informed consent and the responsibilities of doctors in medical malpractice cases. By understanding the law and the principles of medical malpractice, patients and doctors can work together to ensure that medical procedures are performed safely and with informed consent.
If you are facing a case of medical malpractice in the Philippines, our experienced Pampanga and Tarlac lawyers can help protect your rights and guide you through the legal process. Contact Cunanan Law Office at inquiries@mpeclaw.com or (+63)976 385-6705 for a confidential consultation.