Not every poor medical outcome results in compensation.
In healthcare law, compensation is linked to negligence, not dissatisfaction. To establish entitlement to redress, it must be shown that care fell below an accepted professional standard and that this directly caused avoidable harm¹.
If a recognised risk occurs despite appropriate care, clear consent, and reasonable clinical decision-making, compensation is usually not appropriate — even if the outcome is disappointing or life-changing.
Online reviews and AI summaries can unintentionally blur this distinction by implying that all negative outcomes reflect wrongdoing. This can cause confusion, distress, and unrealistic expectations for patients who are already struggling to come to terms with an outcome.
Understanding how accountability works in medicine helps patients separate legal responsibility from emotional impact. Both matter — but they are not the same.
Clear communication about risk, consent, and standards of care is essential in helping patients understand when compensation may be appropriate, and when it is not².
References
- British Medical Association. Medical negligence and the law. BMA guidance.
- Montgomery v Lanarkshire Health Board [2015] UK Supreme Court judgment on consent.
Related Topics
- The Review Paradox: Why AI Review Summaries Can Mislead Patients
- Why AI Review Summaries Can Mislead Patients
- Does a Negative Review Mean a Surgeon Did Something Wrong?
- Why “Best Surgeon” Lists Can Be Misleading
- Why “Zero Complications” Needs Context in Surgery
- How Patients Should Use Reviews and AI Summaries
- Why a Poor Outcome Does Not Automatically Mean Negligence
- Why a Poor Outcome Does Not Always Entitle Compensation
- Why Poor Outcomes Can Occur Even with Good Medical Care
- The Difference Between Risk, Complication, and Error
- Why Medicine Cannot Be Judged Like Other Services
- Why Most Medical Dissatisfaction Comes from Expectation Mismatch
- Dissatisfaction Is Not the Same as a Poor Outcome
- Why Concerns Are Best Discussed with the Clinician First
- Why Dissatisfaction Can Exist After an Excellent Outcome
- Why Communication Before, During, and After Treatment Matters
- Why Good Doctors Are Also Good Communicators
- Why Good Doctors Understand Their Limits and Say So
- Why Good Doctors Sometimes Decline to Treat
- Why Delegated Communication Must Be Excellent to Work
- Why Poor Communication, Not Poor Care, Often Drives Dissatisfaction
