Turkish Doctors Protest "Crippling" Lawsuits and Penalties Threatening Healthcare
Translated from Turkish, summarized and contextualized by DistantNews.
At a glance
- Turkish medical associations are protesting a system that imposes excessive financial and legal penalties on physicians.
- They argue that high compensation claims and criminal proceedings against doctors have become a systemic issue, threatening healthcare quality and professional independence.
- The associations warn that this environment leads to defensive medicine and discourages doctors from taking on complex cases, ultimately harming patient access to care.
Turkish medical associations are raising alarms over a healthcare system they claim imposes "crippling" financial and legal threats on physicians. The Istanbul Chamber of Medicine and the Turkish Medical Association argue that escalating compensation lawsuits and criminal prosecutions against doctors have evolved from isolated disputes into a structural problem.
The compensation and penalty system, which can financially and legally devastate physicians, threatens not only physicians but the entire health service.
During a press conference, the associations highlighted recent cases, including a $50 million compensation claim against a pediatric surgeon in Istanbul. They also cited previous rulings of approximately 78 million Turkish Lira against an OB/GYN and 109 million Turkish Lira against an ENT specialist. These figures, coupled with criminal charges, imprisonment, and detentions, demonstrate the "unpredictable and severe consequences" doctors face under the current system.
The medical bodies contend that such a punitive system not only endangers physicians but also the entire healthcare service. They assert that it fosters "defensive medicine," prompting doctors to avoid high-risk cases and potentially leading to a decline in specialized care. This environment could ultimately weaken the public's access to quality healthcare services.
Such an environment increases defensive medical practices in healthcare delivery; it leads to physicians avoiding intervention in risky cases, the non-preference of high-risk specialties, and consequently, the weakening of the public's access to quality health services.
While acknowledging the necessity of protecting patient rights and addressing damages from medical malpractice, the associations argue that attributing every negative outcome solely to a physician's personal fault is unsustainable. They believe that imposing compensation demands that doctors cannot possibly meet, even with a lifetime of work, undermines patient safety and the right to healthcare. The core principle of "first, do no harm" is jeopardized when the system creates an environment of excessive risk for medical professionals, despite their extensive training and continuous efforts to provide the best care.
However, evaluating every negative outcome encountered in healthcare delivery solely as the personal fault of the physician and leaving physicians facing compensation that they cannot meet even if they work their entire lives is not a fair and sustainable method that protects patient safety and the right to health.
Originally published by Cumhuriyet in Turkish. Translated, summarized, and contextualized by our editorial team with added local perspective. Read our editorial standards.