Legal Remedies for Individuals Suffering from Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD)

Authors

  • Prapaporn Rojsiriruch Srinakharinwirot University

Keywords:

Tort, Civil Remedies, Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD)

Abstract

This research investigates the problems and limitations of Thai civil law in compensating for psychological damages, particularly in cases involving Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). Although Section 446 of the Civil and Commercial Code allows for compensation for non-pecuniary damages, there is still no clear provision that explicitly recognizes psychological harm. The study analyzes key foreign legal precedents and theories, particularly from the United States, Australia, and the United Kingdom, to compare and assess approaches that acknowledge psychological injuries in line with psychiatric science.

The findings lead to recommendations for legal reform in Thailand, such as amending Section 446 to explicitly include psychological damage that may occur without physical injury; extending the period under Section 444 from two years to at least three years to align with the time needed to diagnose PTSD; and revising Section 438 to allow courts greater discretion in evaluating compensation for emotional harm. Additionally, the study proposes the promotion of alternative remedies, such as restorative apologies and restorative justice processes, to ensure that psychological harm is addressed through more diverse and just mechanisms.

References

กนกพร ศิริรักษ์. (2566). ค่าสินไหมทดแทนสำหรับความเสียหายทางจิตใจในกรณีเป็นผู้เสียหายโดยอ้อม. (การค้นคว้าอิสระ นิติศาสตรมหาบัณฑิต สาขากฎหมายเอกชน). คณะนิติศาสตร์: มหาวิทยาลัยธรรมศาสตร์.

ทวีป ศรีน่วม. (2568). ประมวลกฎหมายแพ่งและพาณิชย์. นิติศาสตรดุษฎีบัณฑิต: เนติบัณฑิตไทย

วนัทยา มลคล. (2566). เหตุการณ์สะเทือนใจเสี่ยงต่อโรค PTSD (โรคเครียดจากเหตุการณ์รุนแรง). สืบค้นเมื่อ 1 มิถุนายน 2568, จาก https://shorturl.asia/gj2ti

BGH [Bundesgerichtshof]. (2020). Anwendung der Grundsätze zum Schockschaden auf fehlerhafte ärztliche Behandlung (Urt. v. 21. Mai 2019 – VI ZR 299/17, OLG Köln). Medizinrecht. 38, 35–37.

Dietrich, J. (2003). Nervous shock : Tame v New South Wales and Annetts v Australian Stations Pty Ltd. TortsLaw Journal. 11(1), 11-19.

JUSTIA. (2025). Campbell v. ANIMAL QUARANTINE STATION, ETC. Retrieved. June 1, 2025, from https://law.justia.com/cases/hawaii/supreme-court/1981/6630-2.html

JUSTIA. (2025). Dillon v. Legg. Retrieved. June 1, 2025, from https://law.justia.com/cases/california/supreme-court/2d/68/728.html

JUSTIA. (2025). Jordan v. McKenna 1990. Retrieved. June 1, 2025, from https://law.justia.com/cases/mississippi/supreme-court/1990/07-ca-59116-1.html

New South Wales. (2002). Civil Liability Act 2002 (NSW) s 31. Retrieved. June 2, 2025, from https://www.legislation.nsw.gov.au/view/html/inforce/current/act-2002-022

Schneider, H., & Börner, M. (2021). Opferschutz und Entschädigung im Strafverfahren: Eine rechtsvergleichende Betrachtung. In Kriminalpolitische Schriftenreihe (Vol. 32). Retrieved June 17, 2025, from https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-33657-3

United Kingdom. (2006). Compensation Act 2006. Research. June 17, 2025, From https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2006/29/section/2

Downloads

Published

2025-09-24

How to Cite

Rojsiriruch, P. (2025). Legal Remedies for Individuals Suffering from Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) . Journal of MCU Social Development, 10(2), 316–327. retrieved from https://so06.tci-thaijo.org/index.php/JMSD/article/view/287121