Practice of Medicine
Doctors
or Physicians are qualified individuals and has the necessary specialization to
practice the applied science of medicine to diagnose, treat, heal and prevent
diseases of a person. The role physician’s play within the society is vital for
they restore and maintain the health and well being of the public against
illness and diseases that would affect their daily routines and life. The
importance of such individual within the community is crucial for they serve as
an agent that bridges the gap between science and society and they do help us
understand things that are unknown and might baffle and ordinary man. They can
bestow upon fate of a man for their success or failure would have a changing
impact in the society.
It
would only be just and understandable that having such power entails a great
amount of responsibility that would greatly affect the general welfare of the
public. From which the state through its inherent police power has enacted Republic Act No. 2382 or the Medical Act of
1959[1] to
regulate the practice of medicine by setting qualifications, standards, terms
and agencies that would administer the practice of medicine within the country.
For a person to practice medicine there are several prerequisite that was set
through Section 8 Article III of R.A. No. 2382 (Medical Act):
“Prerequisite to the practice of medicine. No person shall engage
in the practice of medicine in the Philippines unless he is at least twenty-one
years of age, has satisfactorily passed the corresponding Board Examination,
and is a holder of a valid Certificate of Registration duly issued to him by
the Board of Medical Examiners.”[2]
As
per the Medical Act a person could only practice medicine after meeting the
three requirements mentioned. If an individual does not possess all the
requirements and qualifications then he should not be considered as qualified
to practice medicine in the Philippines. A qualified person to practice
medicine has met all the necessary educational, experience, certification, moral,
mental and civil requirements as prescribed by law. In the case of Reyes vs
Sisters Of Mercy Hospital, it has elaborated the right to practice medicine
“The practice of medicine is a
profession engaged in only by qualified individuals. It is a right earned
through years of education, training, and by first obtaining a license from the
state through professional board examinations.”[3]
Once
qualified a person may then be involve on acts constituting the practice of
medicine. As governed by The Medical Act of 1959 under Section 10 Article III,
the following acts constitute the practice of medicine:
“A person shall be considered as
engaged in the practice of medicine (a) who shall, for compensation, fee,
salary or reward in any form, paid to him directly or through another, or even
without the same, physical examine any person, and diagnose, treat, operate or
prescribe any remedy for any human disease, injury, deformity, physical, mental
or physical condition or any ailment, real or imaginary, regardless of the
nature of the remedy or treatment administered, prescribed or recommended; or
(b) who shall, by means of signs, cards, advertisements, written or printed
matter, or through the radio, television or any other means of communication,
either offer or undertake by any means or method to diagnose, treat, operate or
prescribe any remedy for any human disease, injury, deformity, physical, mental
or physical condition; or (c) who shall use the title M.D. after his name.”[4]
Only
qualified individuals are entitled to perform acts that would constitute the
practice of medicine, violation from which would constitute illegal practice of
medicine with the exception to those defined by law.
Hospitals
Generally
speaking hospitals are places where people seek and resort for medical
attention. Hospitals may either be public or private depending on who owned and
operate them. They are juridical \persons[5]
generally incorporated bodies created by a special law or charter or
incorporation under a general law. For private hospitals as a traditional view,
physicians are not considered as an employee or agent of a hospital. For
whenever a physician act upon his professional capacity, the hospital cannot be
held liable for their fault or negligence under the Schloendorff doctrine[6].
However, the traditional view has given way to the modern practice wherein
hospitals has become more than just a place that would furnish room, food,
facilities and treatment, instead has become centers for treatment with
sufficient and modern facilities aiming to the full care of their patients.
Given this modern practice, hospitals could be held liable for negligence of
its employee under quasi-delict for “Employers
shall be liable for the damages caused by their employees”[7].
As provided by the Supreme Court on the Ramos vs CA case that hospitals
exercise real control over their attending and visiting consultants. While
consultants are not technically employees, the
control exercised, the hiring and the right to terminate all fulfill the
important hallmarks of an employee-employer relationship[8].
The
doctrine of corporate negligence was introduced on the landmark case of Professional Services Inc vs. Natividad[9],
wherein the petitioner was held solidarily liable with the physician for the
hospital and doctor are bound by the employer-employee relation. Under the said
doctrine the hospital owes a direct duty to its patients to ensure their safety
and well-being.
Employment of Physician to a
Hospital
In
a scenario wherein a hospital would hire the doctors directly as employees
making them in-house doctors for institutional clients and walk-in patients, is
permissible for there is no express prohibition under the law that prohibits a
hospital maintained by a corporation for the purpose of furnishing medical
treatment[10].
What is prohibited under the law is the illegal and negligent practice of
medicine. Illegal practice of medicine are those in violation of Section 8 and 10 under Article III of the
Medical Act of 1959[11]
wherein penalties are defined under Section
28 under Article IV[12]
of the same act which includes fines and imprisonment. What would be considered
to be an illegal practice of law under such circumstance would be when the
physician on the practice of medicine would not act upon his personal capacity but
instead act as an agent or employee of the said hospital or corporation would
constitute the illegal practice of medicine. Such acts would be when payment is
received by the hospital for the medical practice done by the physician, when
the physician not acting on his personal capacity but as an agent of the
hospital would administer, prescribe and recommend treatment and when the
hospital would advertise such medical practice in any form or medium.
Performance of such acts would constitute a practice of medicine by the Hospital
as a corporation, which would result to an illegal practice of medicine. For the
Hospital as a juridical person is not qualified to practice medicine. For the
practice of such profession is protected by our constitution, only to be
performed by a natural person.
The
hospital as a juridical person would not also be qualified to practice medicine
for its has not met the requirements defined on Section 8 Article III of the
Medical Act of 1959 that would require a
person to be at least 21 years of age, passed the board examination and has a
valid certification issued by the board of medical examiner[14]. Nor
has it fall within the exceptions and limited practice as provided by law.
A
hospital may hire physicians as employees as long as such individuals practice
their profession in their personal capacity, but this would not exempt the
hospital from liabilities against the negligence of its employees for the
liability of the employers on the negligence of its employee is provided under
Article 2180 of the Civil Code base on the relationship of patria potestas. For
the practice of medicine is already
conditioned upon on the highest degree of diligence as elaborated on the case
of Reyes vs Sisters of Mercy Hospital[15]. Such due care should be complied with
and exercised for the health and life of a person is on the hands and
successful accomplishment of that person’s task and duties to society.
[1]
Republic Act No. 2382, The Medical Act of 1959
[2] Republic
Act No. 2382 The Medical Act of 1959 , Section 8
[3] Reyes
vs, Sisters Of Mercy Hospital G.R. No. 130547, October 3, 2000
[4] Republic
Act No. 2382, The Medical Act of 1959, Section 10
[5]
Civil Code, Article 44
[6]
Professional Services Inc. vs. Natividad 513 SCRA 478, G.R. No. 126297, January
31, 2007
[7]
Civil Code, Article 2180
[8]
Ramos vs Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 124354, December 29, 1999, 321 SCRA 584
[9]
Professional Services Inc. vs. Natividad 513 SCRA 478, G.R. No. 126297, January
31, 2007
[10]
ACEBEDO Optical Company vs. CA, G.R. No. 100152, 314 SCRA 315,March 31, 2000
[11]
Republic Act No. 2382, Medical Act of 1959, Section 8 and Section 10
[12]
Republic Act No. 2382, Medical Act of 1959, Section 28
[13]
Constitution, Article XII, Section 14
[14]
Republic Act No. 2382, The Medical Act of 1959, Section 8
[15] Reyes
vs, Sisters Of Mercy Hospital G.R. No. 130547, October 3, 2000
No comments:
Post a Comment