Retinopathy of Prematurity (RoP) costed Rs.1.80 Cr. to the Drs. alongwith Hospital !!

Neonate experts and Pediatricians to ponder over....



The Apex Court in the case of V. Krishnakumar V/s. State of Tamilnadu (AIR 2015 SC 2836, Civil Appeal no.8065/2009) has saddled the huge compensation upon the Drs for Negligence....




The Facts in nutshell may be read as under :




The female child weighing 1250 gms was born in 29th week of pregnancy to the Appellant and his wife in, August 1996 at the Government Hospital. But the neonatal expert and the paediatrician at the hospital never warned the parents that all babies born prematurely were prone to Retinopathy of Prematurity (RoP) and that if early preventive measures were not taken, it could result in blindness.




The Appellant contended that Within a year of birth, they consulted many paediatricians in Chennai, Mumbai and Madurai, who said that because non-preventive medical measures were not taken, the child was on the verge of losing her eyesight as RoP stage-V, the final stage before blindness, had set in. The parents with lots of hope, went to USA for surgeries, but in vain. 




The Appellant approached S.C. as the National Commission by holding the Negligence to be proved, awarded Rs.5 lacks as compensation.
The report filed by AIIMS was also considered while giving the verdict.

The Apex Court observed "Advsie in nature of scrawl in corner of discharge paper that "mother informed about alarm signs was not sufficient to support the defence that sufficient precautions against eye disease that causes blindness in premature babies were taken". 
The Hospital ought to have advised parents that the baby is required to be seen by paediatric ophthalmologist since there was possibility ity of occurrence of ROP. 



Not only Drs but the Hospital were also negligent and deficient in their services as they did not inform parents about possibility of OCCURRENCE OF AN EYE DISEASE THAT CAUSES BLINDNESS, even the Drs at private clinics also did not advice for screening".



The Apex Court enhanced the compensation to Rs.1.38 crore and also awarded Rs 42 lakh as reimbursement of medical expenses, taking the total award to Rs 1.80 crore. The court held that parents of the victim are to be compensated for financial hardship faced by them in terms of lost wages and time and the Court adopted Standard future Value Formula to account for INFLATION !!!



One more aspect I  think is that this is the case of 20 years back... At that time the technology might not be that advanced like as on today... So such cases will rarely repeated in future.. won't they ?



THANKS AND REGARDS




ADV. ROHiT ERANDE
PUNE. ©

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

A Physician is free to decide whom he/she will serve, except in case of Emergency – Court rejects 2.5 Crore petition against Doctor & Hospital

A Physician is free to decide whom he/she will serve, except in case of Emergency –  Court rejects 2.5 Crore petition against Doctor & Hospital “Its in the interest of Patients that Doctors. should not be dragged to the Court unnecessarily”” – National Commission observed while dismissing the Compliant for damages of Rs.2.5 Crores as it prevents Doctors from discharging their duty to a suffering person who needs their assistance utmost. A Physician is free to decide whom he will serve, save in case of Emergency –  Court rejects 2.5 Crore petition against Doctor & Hospital Case : SUMAN TANEJA V/s. METRO HOSPITAL & HEART INSTITUTE & 3 ORS, decided on 02/02/2016. Factual Matrix in nutshell : 1. The Complainant, widow of deceased patient claimed damages to the tune of Rs. Two & half Crores on the ground that her husband who was diagnosed as Inferior Wall Myocardial Infarction (IWMI).did not receive the emergency treatment in Golden Hours.The Doctor refused t
Read more

A "Supreme Judgment" with manifold reliefs to Doctors and Hospital : Perhaps the year end gift for Doctors.-Adv. ROHiT ERANDE.©

 The "Supreme Judgment" with manifold reliefs to Doctors and Hospital : Perhaps the year end gift for Doctors.  Adv. ROHiT ERANDE.© a. Non availability of Operation Theatre is not a valid ground to hold Hospital Negligent : b. Non functioning of Machines and Equipments cannot be said to be Negligence. c. It is an incorrect assumption to say that, "since surgery was performed by a doctor, he alone would be responsible for different aspects of the treatment required and given to the patient". d. It is too much to expect from a doctor to remain on the bed side of the patient throughout his stay in the hospital. e. Every death of a patient cannot on the face of it be considered to be medical negligence. f.  In spite of the treatment, if the patient had not survived, the doctors cannot be blamed as even the doctors with the best of their abilities cannot prevent the inevitable g. The doctor cannot be held liable for medical negligence by applying the doctrine of  res ips
Read more

"MD Medicine Dr. fined Rs.41 lakh for doing pleural tapping test without Sonography, that too in Causality section

"MD Medicine Dr. fined Rs.41 lakh for doing pleural tapping test without Sonography, that too in Causality section " The Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, (MSCDRC) in its recent judgment dated 31/03/2017, gave the verdict against the Doctor, but absolved the Hospital.. Case details - Mr.Prashant Tamhane V/s. P.D. hinduja Hospital and anr. CC No.221 of 2003. http://cms.nic.in/ncdrcusersWeb/GetPdf.do… Facts in short : 1. This is the case of 2002. The wife (since deceased) of the Complainant was admitted in the Hospital after the blood reports revealed symptoms of hepatitis. There she was examined by Dr.Ashit Hegde, the Opponent no.2 Doctor in the present case. At that time he after examining the patient he thought it fit for not admitting the patient. By taking medication she was improving. 2.However after about one month, she had Chest pain and difficulty in breathing. Initial X-ray was normal, but in later X-ray, she was diagno
Read more