1.

The Philippine Medical Association’s (PMA) Code of Ethics

Under the PMA’s Code of Ethics patient privacy and confidentiality is covered by Article 2.
Duties of Physicians to their Patients, in the PMA Code:

“Section 6. The physician should hold as sacred and highly confidential whatever may be
discovered or learned pertinent to the patient even after death, except when required in the
promotion of justice, safety and public health.”

The Magna Carta of Patient’s Bill of Rights and Obligations

The Magna Carta stating patient’s bill of rights and obligations has made to to the house of
Congress several times. One version is sponsored by Senator Pia Cayetano, during the 16th
Congress:

“Right To Privacy and Confidentiality–The patient has the right to privacy and protection from
unwarranted publicity. The right to privacy shall include the patient’s right not to be subjected
to exposure, private or public, either by photography, publications, video-taping, discussion, or
by any other means that would otherwise tend to reveal his person and identity and the
circumstances under which he was, he is, or he will be, under medical or surgical care or
treatment. … All identifiable information about a patient’s health status, medical condition,
diagnosis, prognosis and treatment, and all other information of a personal kind, must be kept
confidential even after death. Provided, That descendants may have a right of access to
information that will inform them of their health risks. All identifiable Patient data must also be
protected. The protection of the data must be appropriate as to the manner of its storage.
Human substance from which identifiable data can be derived must be likewise protected.

Confidential information can be disclosed in the following cases: i. When the patient’s medical
or physical condition is in controversy in a court litigation and the court, in its discretion, orders
the patient to submit to physical or mental examination of a physician; ii. When public health or
safety so demands; iii. When the Patient, or in his incapacity, his/her legal representative,
expressly gives the consent; iv. When the patient’s medical or surgical condition is discussid in a
medical or scientific forum for expert discussion for I his/her benefit or for the advancement of
science and 6 medicine, Provided however, That the identity of the Patient should not be
revealed; and v. When it is otherwise required by law.”

2. IMPOSSIBLE CRIME
ARTICLE 4 par. 2- An act which would be an offenseagainst persons or property were it not for
the inherent impossibility of its accomplishment on or account of the employment of
inadequate or ineffectual means. Why are impossible crimes punishable? - commission of
impossible crime- indicative of criminal propensity on the part of the actor- society must be
protected from socially dangerous persons.

Requisites of Impossible Crime

1. That the act performed would be an offense against persons or property
2. That the act was done with evil intent
3. That its accomplishment is inherently impossible, or that means employed is either
inadequate or ineffectual
4. That the act performed should not constitute a violation of another provision in the RPC

3. Pursuant to our Family Code, only the following are considered as valid grounds for the
declaration of absolute nullity of marriage: (1) either party is below 18 years of age, even
with the consent of parents or guardians; (2) marriage was solemnized by a person not
legally authorized to perform marriages, unless it was contracted with either or both parties
believing in good faith that the solemnizing officer had the legal authority to do so; (3)
marriage was solemnized without license, except those allowed under the law; (4) bigamous
or polygamous marriages not falling under Article 41; (5) marriage was contracted through
mistake of one contracting party as to the identity of the other; (6) subsequent marriages
that are void under Article 53; (7) either party was psychologically incapacitated to comply
with the essential marital obligations of marriage at the time of the celebration of the
marriage; (8) incestuous marriages; (9) marriages which are void from the beginning for
reasons of public policy (Articles 35, 36, 37 and 38, Ibid.)

Insofar as filing a petition for annulment of marriage, any of the following grounds must be
present: (1) either party was 18 years of age or over but below twenty-one, and the
marriage was solemnized without the consent of his parents, guardian or person having
substitute parental authority over the party, in that order, unless after attaining the age of
twenty-one, he/she freely cohabited with the other party; (2) either party was of unsound
mind, unless such party after coming to reason, freely cohabited with the other as husband
and wife; (3) consent of either party was obtained by fraud, unless such party afterwards,
with full knowledge of the facts constituting the fraud, freely cohabited with the other; (4)
the consent of either party was obtained by force, intimidation or undue influence, unless
the same having disappeared or ceased, such party thereafter freely cohabited with the
other; (5) either party was physically incapable of consummating the marriage with the
other, and such incapacity continues and appears to be incurable; or (6) either party was
afflicted with a sexually-transmissible disease found to be serious and appears to be
incurable (Article 45, Id.)

4. A medical malpractice case against a doctor is a generic term for what may
technically be an administrative complaint, a civil suit for damages (under Article
2176 of the Civil Code), a criminal case (under Article 365 of the Revised Penal
Code), or all three.
How is medical malpractice proven? Conversely, how does a doctor defend herself
from such a charge?

The rulings of the Supreme Court on the liabilities of doctors outline how to prove
medical malpractice or negligence. They lay down the standards of evidence for
proving whether a complaint for medical malpractice should be upheld or dismissed.

For one, the mere fact of an unfortunate or even tragic outcome is often insufficient
proof of a doctor’s negligence.

In 1997, the Supreme Court affirmed that:

Doctors are protected by a special rule of law. They are not guarantors of care. They
do not even warrant a good result. They are not insurers against mishaps or unusual
consequences. Furthermore they are not liable for honest mistakes of judgment . . .
Dr. Ninevetch Cruz vs. Court of Appeals and Lydia Umali, G.R. No. 122445,
November 18, 1997

Other cases show how a medical malpractice case is proven. We see from these
cases that Courts tend to defer to evidence presented by experts — medical
physicians or surgeons — about whether the actions of a doctor were in line with
professional standards and practices.

The type of lawsuit which has been called medical malpractice or, more
appropriately, medical negligence, is that type of claim which a victim has available
to him or her to redress a wrong committed by a medical professional which has
caused bodily harm. In order to successfully pursue such a claim, a patient must
prove that a health care provider, in most cases a physician, either failed to do
something which a reasonably prudent health care provider would have done, or that
he or she did something that a reasonably prudent provider would not have done;
and that that failure or action caused injury to the patient.

This Court has recognized that medical negligence cases are best proved by
opinions of expert witnesses belonging in the same general neighborhood and in the
same general line of practice as defendant physician or surgeon. The deference of
courts to the expert opinion of qualified physicians stems from the former’s
realization that the latter possess unusual technical skills which laymen in most
instances are incapable of intelligently evaluating, hence the indispensability of
expert testimonies.
Dr. Rubli Li vs. Spouses Soliman, G.R. No. 165279, June 7, 2011

Whether or not a physician has committed an “inexcusable lack of precaution” in the

treatment of his patient is to be determined according to the standard of care
observed by other members of the profession in good standing under similar
circumstances bearing in mind the advanced state of the profession at the time of
 treatment or the present state of medical science. In the recent case of Leonila
Garcia-Rueda v. Wilfred L. Pascasio, et al., this Court stated that in accepting a
case, a doctor in effect represents that, having the needed training and skill
possessed by physicians and surgeons practicing in the same field, he will employ
such training, care and skill in the treatment of his patients. He therefore has a duty
to use at least the same level of care that any other reasonably competent doctor
would use to treat a condition under the same circumstances. It is in this aspect of
medical malpractice that expert testimony is essential to establish not only the
standard of care of the profession but also that the physician’s conduct in the
treatment and care falls below such standard. Further, inasmuch as the causes of
the injuries involved in malpractice actions are determinable only in the light of
scientific knowledge, it has been recognized that expert testimony is usually
necessary to support the conclusion as to causation.
Dr. Ninevetch Cruz vs. Court of Appeals and Lydia Umali, G.R. No. 122445,
November 18, 1997

Proof of Medical Malpractice

As a rule, Courts do not favor mere allegations as proof of liability. More is

required for proof.

What this means in practice is that, in order to prove a case of medical

malpractice against a doctor, evidence of these medical, professional standards
need to be presented in Court. A layman’s evidence is not enough. The evidence
required typically takes the form of testimony by other doctors in the same or
related fields of practice, and of medical literature and regulations have duly
proven before the Court. Evidence should also be presented to prove that the
doctor failed to abide by these standards. Absent these, a finding of liability can
be difficult to sustain.

Medical rules and literature can also be presented as evidence.

Conversely, a doctor defending herself from a complaint of medical malpractice

or negligence would be well advised to show proof of the standards and
particular procedures required by the situation. She should present proof that she
followed these standards of care.

5. ___

6. ___

7. Intentional Abortion
 By acting, with the consent of the pregnant woman. This applies 
to the administration or use of drugs or beverages with the full 
knowledge and consent of the pregnant woman herself. 
The purpose of the division of the crime into three paragraphs is 
to graduate the penalties depending upon the use of violence and 
knowledge of the pregnant woman. It is not based upon medical 
science. 
The Revised Penal Code of the Philippines, Act. No. 3815 of
December 8, 1930, Articles 256 - 259

Section Two. - Infanticide and abortion.

Art. 256. Intentional abortion. - Any person who shall intentionally cause an abortion shall suffer:

1. The penalty of reclusion temporal, if he shall use any violence upon the person of the pregnant woman.

2. The penalty of prision mayor if, without using violence, he shall act without the consent of the woman.

3. The penalty of prision correccional in its medium and maximum periods, if the woman shall have
consented.

Art. 257. Unintentional abortion. - The penalty of prision correccional in its minimum and medium period
shall be imposed upon any person who shall cause an abortion by violence, but unintentionally.

Art. 258. Abortion practiced by the woman herself of by her parents. - The penalty of prision correccional
in its medium and maximum periods shall be imposed upon a woman who shall practice abortion upon
herself or shall consent that any other person should do so.
Any woman who shall commit this offense to conceal her dishonor, shall suffer the penalty of prision
correccional in its minimum and medium periods.
If this crime be committed by the parents of the pregnant woman or either of them, and they act with the
consent of said woman for the purpose of concealing her dishonor, the offenders shall suffer the penalty
of prision correccional in its medium and maximum periods.

Art. 259. Abortion practiced by a physician or midwife and dispensing of abortives.- The penalties
provided in Article 256 shall be imposed in its maximum period, respectively, upon any physician or
midwife who, taking advantage of their scientific knowledge or skill, shall cause an abortion or assist in
causing the same.

Any pharmacist who, without the proper prescription from a physician, shall dispense any abortive shall
suffer arresto mayor and a fine not exceeding 1,000 pesos.

8.