Profit-driven care blurs line between negligence and gross exploitation
MEDICAL overtreatments are an unresolved concern in our society and contribute to patient injury and increased costs.
In Malaysia, a troubling trend emerges where profit-driven healthcare decisions blur the line between medical negligence and deliberate exploitation. Endocrinologists casually suggest thyroid removal for benign nodules, driven by insurance coverage rather than clinical necessity. This raises critical questions about where the line between standard medical errors and gross negligence lies under Malaysian tort law.
While ordinary negligence stems from honest mistakes or failures to meet expected standards, gross negligence involves a reckless disregard for patient safety, often motivated by financial gain. In medical malpractice cases, distinguishing between these two forms of negligence is challenging, as both result from clinical errors.
However, gross negligence demands a higher standard, requiring evidence of conscious disregard for risks or prioritisation of profits. This issue extends beyond individual cases to broader systemic concerns, with insurance policies encouraging unnecessary surgeries to avoid potential claims. Such practices not only endanger patients but also inflate healthcare costs.
The focus must shift back to clinical necessity, with strong oversight from regulatory bodies and clear judicial standards to ensure patient safety remains paramount.
Written by urgent.news from New Straits Times's reporting — not their text. Machine-written — may contain errors; check the original before relying on it.
