Mediation in Medical Disputes as a Pathway to Substantive Justice: Reframing Global Health Law through Human-Centered Dispute Resolution: Mediation in Medical Disputes as a Pathway to Substantive Justice: Reframing Global Health Law through Human-Centered Dispute Resolution

Raymond Nadeak; Risma  Situmorang; Supaphorn  Akkapin

doi:10.56107/penalaw.v4i1.293

Authors

Raymond Nadeak Doctor of Law Studies Program, Postgraduate Program - Jayabaya University, Indonesia
Risma Situmorang Doctor of Law Studies Program, Postgraduate Program - Jayabaya University, Indonesia
Supaphorn Akkapin Rajamangala University Of Technology Krungthep, Thailand

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.56107/penalaw.v4i1.293

Keywords:

Mediation; Medical Disputes; Substantive Justice; Health Law; Restorative Justice; Global Health Governance

Abstract

Medical disputes are increasingly common worldwide as patients become more aware of their rights and healthcare providers face stricter professional standards. Conventional litigation, while ensuring procedural justice, often fails to address the ethical, moral, and psychological aspects of medical conflicts. This research highlights a key gap in the literature: the limited recognition of mediation not just as a cost-effective alternative but as a tool for achieving substantive justice. Using a qualitative normative approach, this study combines doctrinal and comparative analyses. Findings show that mediation resolves disputes more efficiently than litigation and at much lower costs. Beyond efficiency, mediation improves access and delivers substantive justice by addressing patients’ emotional needs, rebuilding trust, and maintaining professional integrity. However, challenges still exist, including limited legal recognition of mediation outcomes, a shortage of specialized mediators, and cultural resistance favoring litigation. This study contributes theoretically by reframing mediation as a justice-oriented process aligned with restorative justice and practically by offering policy suggestions to strengthen mediation’s legitimacy and institutional role in global health governance. Therefore, mediation should be recognized not only as an alternative procedure but as a key instrument for substantive justice within international health law.

References

Ann O’hara, E., & Yam, D. (2002). On Apology and Consilience. Washington Law Review, 77(4), 1121. https://digitalcommons.law.uw.edu/wlrAvailableat:https://digitalcommons.law.uw.edu/wlr/vol77/iss4/4

Bingham, L. (2004). Control over Dispute-System Design and Mandatory Commercial Arbitration. Law and Contemporary Problems, 67, 221–251.

Bottoms, A., & Tankebe, J. (2013). Beyond Procedural Justice: A Dialogic Approach to Legitimacy in Criminal Justice. Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology, 102(1), 119–170. https://scholarlycommons.law.northwestern.edu/jclc/vol102/iss1/4

Brown, H., & Simanowitz, A. (1995). Alternative dispute resolution and mediation. Quality in Health Care : QHC, 4(2), 151–158.

Daniel, A. E., Burn, R. J., & Horarik, S. (1999). Patients’ complaints about medical practice. Medical Journal of Australia, 170(12), 598–602. https://doi.org/10.5694/j.1326-5377.1999.tb127910.x

Deason, E. E. (2005). Procedural rules for complementary systems of litigation and mediation - Worldwide. Notre Dame Law Review, 80(2), 553–592.

Dhanudibroto, H., Widjaja, G., & Sijabat, H. H. (2025). Restorative Approach As An Alternative To Resolving Digital Health Service Disputes. 3(6), 1093–1100.

Eftekhari, M. H., Parsapoor, A., Ahmadi, A., Yavari, N., Larijani, B., & Gooshki, E. S. (2023). Exploring defensive medicine: examples, underlying and contextual factors, and potential strategies - a qualitative study. BMC Medical Ethics, 24(1), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12910-023-00949-2

Eryani, S., Richard, T., & Samosir, A. (2025). Impact of Health Law Reforms on Patient Rights and Medical Professional Accountability Worldwide. Jurnal Ar Ro’is Mandalika (Armada), 5(2), 342–352.

Gatti, L., & McAvoy, P. (2024). Theorizing to Cases: A Methodological Approach to Qualitative Normative Cases. Educational Theory, 74(3), 350–357. https://doi.org/10.1111/edth.12611

Hutchinson, T. (2016). The Doctrinal Method: Incorporating Interdisciplinary Methods in Reforming the Law. Erasmus Law Review, 8(3), 130–138. https://doi.org/10.5553/elr.000055

Liang, C.-M. (2015). Rethinking the tort liability system and patient safety: From the conventional wisdom to learning from litigation. Indiana Health Law Review, 12(1), 328–381. https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.18060/18965

Menkel-meadow, C. (2002). University of Miami Law Review Ethics Issues in Arbitration and Related Dispute Resolution Processes : What ’ s Happening and What ’ s Not Ethics Issues in Arbitration and Related Dispute Resolution Processes : What ’ s Happening and What ’ s Not. U. Miami L. Rev, 56(4), 949–1007.

Metzloff, T. B., Peeples, R. A., & Harris, C. T. (1997). Empirical Perspectives on Mediation and Malpractice. Law and Contemporary Problems, 60(1), 107. https://doi.org/10.2307/1191997

Niemeijer, B., & Pel, M. (2005). Court-Based mediation in the Netherlands: Research, evaluation and future expectations. Dickinson Law Review, 110(2), 345–379.

Ridd, M., Shaw, A., Lewis, G., & Salisbury, C. (2009). The patient-doctor relationship: A synthesis of the qualitative literature on patients’ perspectives. British Journal of General Practice, 59(561), 268–275. https://doi.org/10.3399/bjgp09X420248

Robles, T. F., Slatcher, R. B., Trombello, J. M., & McGinn, M. M. (2015). Marital Quality and Health: A Meta-Analytic Review. Psychological Bulletin, 140(1), 140–187. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0031859

Seul, J. R. (2004). Settling Significant Cases. Washington Law Review, 79(3), 881.

Shen, Y., Li, G., Tang, Z., Wang, Q., Zhang, Z., Hao, X., & Han, X. (2024). Analysis of the characteristics, efficiency, and influencing factors of third-party mediation mechanisms for resolving medical disputes in public hospitals in China. BMC Public Health, 24(1), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-024-19366-0

Smith, S., & Martinez, J. (2009). An Analytic Framework for Dispute Systems Design. Harv. Negot. L. Rev., 14, 123.

Sohn, D. H., & Sonny Bal, B. (2012). Medical malpractice reform: The role of alternative dispute resolution. Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research, 470(5), 1370–1378. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11999-011-2206-2

Struve, C. T. (2004). Doctors, the adversary system, and procedural reform in medical liability litigation. Fordham Law Review, 72(4), 943–1016.

Tyler, T. R. (2003). Procedural Justice, Legitimacy, and the Effective Rule of Law. Crime and Justice, 30, 283–357.

Mediation in Medical Disputes as a Pathway to Substantive Justice: Reframing Global Health Law through Human-Centered Dispute Resolution