From ancient healing to modern litigation: a historical journey through medical negligence and tort law
,
Abstract
This article traces the historical evolution of medical negligence from ancient outcome-based penalties to modern tort law. Employing a historical-analytical method, it examines primary legal texts—from the Code of Hammurabi to landmark cases like Bolam and Bolitho—and secondary sources to analyze this transformation. The findings reveal a shift from ancient codes that penalized results, through medieval guild regulation, to the common law's establishment of a duty of care and a professionally defined standard subject to judicial scrutiny. Modern developments, such as the rise of informed consent and defensive medicine, illustrate tort law's ongoing adaptation to the complexities of healthcare. The conclusion underscores that this journey reflects evolving societal expectations for reasonable medical care, balancing patient rights with clinical realities. Understanding this history is vital for contemporary debates on patient safety and professional accountability, pointing to future research into non-Western traditions as well as to challenges such as artificial intelligence.
Saputra B, Bene O, Aprizon Putra D. Analyzing the Code of Hammurabi: exploring ancient legal principles and their relevance in modern law. NEGREI Acad J Law Gov 2024; 4(1): 4-9.
Karamanou M, Androutsos G, Poulakou-Rebelakou E, Kousoulis AA. The Hippocratic Oath: a pledge for physicians, then and now. Hell J Cardiol 2016; 57(5): 289-91.
Gordley J. The jurists: a critical history. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2021.
Azizi MH. The history of ancient Persian medicine. Iran J Public Health 2007; 36(Suppl 1): 1-5.
Shaki M. The concept of the physician in ancient Iran. In: Acta Iranica. 3rd series, Vol. 21. Leiden: Brill; 1981.
Zaehner RC. The dawn and twilight of Zoroastrianism. New York: Putnam; 1961.
Jafarey AA. The Vendidad: its code of conduct. In: Cama KR, editor. Cama Oriental Institute proceedings. Bombay: Cama Oriental Institute; 1989.
McGrew RE. Encyclopedia of medical history. New York: McGraw-Hill; 1985.
Mello MM, Studdert DM, Kachalia AB. The medical liability system and quality of health care. N Engl J Med 2022; 386: 1856-64.
Lindenfeld E. Moving beyond the quick fix: medical malpractice non-economic damage caps a poor solution to the growing healthcare crisis. Thurgood Marsh Law Rev 2016; 41(1): 107-35.
Plunkett J. The historical foundations of the duty of care. Monash Univ Law Rev 2015; 41(3): 717-45.
Donoghue v Stevenson [1932] UKHL 100.
Peters PG. The role of the doctor-patient relationship in medical malpractice. In: Sanbar SS, editor. Legal medicine. 7th ed. St. Louis: Mosby; 2007. p. 45-62.
Harpwood V. Principles of tort law. London: Cavendish Publishing; 2000.
Samanta A, Samanta J. The standard of care in medical negligence: a complex web of policy and practice. Clin Med (Lond) 2019; 19(3): 218-21.
Kopitnik NL, Nouhan PP. Expert witness. In: StatPearls [Internet]. Treasure Island (FL): StatPearls Publishing; 2024.
Chapman CB. Stratton vs. Swanlond: the fourteenth-century ancestor of the law of malpractice. Pharos Alpha Omega Alpha Honor Med Soc 1982; 45: 20-4.
Annas GJ. Doctors, patients, and lawyers: two centuries of health law. N Engl J Med 2012; 367: 445-50.
Bolam v Friern Hospital Management Committee [1957] 1 WLR 582.
Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority [1998] AC 232.
Stauch M. The 'loss of chance' doctrine in medical negligence: a comparative analysis. Med Law Rev 2020; 28(2): 211-33.
Wilsher v Essex Area Health Authority [1988] AC 1074.
Ginsberg M. The locality rule lives! Why? Using modern medicine to eradicate an 'unhealthy' law. Drake Law Rev 2013; 61: 323-65.
Hyman DA, Black B, Silver C, Sage WM. Does tort reform affect the size and shape of medical malpractice claims? Evidence from Texas. J Empir Leg Stud 2019; 16(1): 86-119.
British Medical Association. Medical ethics today: the BMA's handbook of ethics and law. 3rd ed. London: BMJ Books; 2024.
Dehlawi S, Alqahtani MD, Alzhrani MM, Alhazmi AH. Medical negligence in healthcare organizations and its impact on patient safety and public health: a bibliometric study. J Patient Saf Risk Manag 2021; 26(2): 60-71.
Panagiotou OA. Professional standards, clinical guidelines and medical liability. Eur J Health Law 2018; 25(2): 159-81.
Sydney South West Area Health Service v Stamoulis [2009] NSWCA 153.
Keefe R. Causation problems in medical negligence cases. Precedent 2023; (177): 44-8.
Skene L. Loss of chance in medical negligence. Anaesth Intensive Care 2014; 42(3): 300-3.
Avraham R. The economics of non-economic damages. J Tort Law 2019; 12(1): 1-35.
Bishop MC. The negligence of medical experts. J R Soc Med 2004; 97(12): 599-600.
Bennett C. The gatekeeping role in medical negligence litigation: a critical review of expert evidence standards. Int J Law Psychiatry 2021; 74: 101668.
Hart JT. Book of the month: The autonomous patient: ending paternalism in medical care. J R Soc Med 2002; 95(12): 623-4.
Pugh J. Informed consent, autonomy, and beliefs. In: Autonomy, rationality, and contemporary bioethics. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2020.
Keren-Paz T. Compensating injury to autonomy in English negligence law: inconsistent recognition. Med Law Rev 2018; 26(4): 585-609.
Sekhar M, Vyas N. Defensive medicine: a bane to healthcare. Ann Med Health Sci Res 2013; 3(2): 295-6.
Macchiaroli Eggen J. Mental disabilities and duty in negligence law: will neuroscience reform tort doctrine? Indiana Health Law Rev 2015; 12(2): 591-634.
| Files | ||
| Issue | Vol 18 (2025) | |
| Section | Original Article(s) | |
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.18502/jmehm.v18i19.20604 | |
| Keywords | ||
| Medical negligence; Medical malpractice; Tort law; History of medicine; Bolam test. | ||
| Rights and permissions | |
|
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |
