A Doctor is not expected to work like a machine or a computer; He is also a human being".."
"A doctor cannot give complete assurance and guarantee to save life of a patient. "
Adv. ROHiT ERANDE.© Case Details :
Adv. ROHiT ERANDE.© Case Details :
Charan Kamal Chopra V/s. Dr. R.K. Gupta, Haryana & anr.
Rev. Pet. No. 1942/2018.
Before : Hon Dr. S.M. Kantikar - Presiding Member &
Hon. Mr. Dinesh Singh, Member
Decided on : 18/04/2019
Judgment Link
Facts in short :
1. The Complainant's mother 78 yrs of age, the patient in this case, was admitted in the Hospital in ICCU. All the tests like ECH, Echo, , Blood tests, USG etc. were perfomred.
2. The patient was a known patient of High BP and Diabetics for nearly 15 years. Her blood urea was 152% mg and Serum Creatinie was 8.2% mg, which was much more than the normal range.
3. Thus as it was a case of renal failure, as a standard protocol she was advised hemodialysis.
4. It was alleged that if the patient had a kidney problem, injection Lasix should have been administered before starting dialysis, but it was administered during dialysis, therefore, due to old age, the patient could not sustain the treatment, which caused death of the patient on the next day i.e 01.12.2010.
5. The District Forum allowed the compliant and asked the doctors to pay Rs.1,00,000/- with Rs.5000/- towards litigation expenses.
6. However in appeal filed by Doctors and Hospital, the State Commission reversed the finding of the District Forum and allowed appeal in favour of Doctors and Hospital.
7. Hence the Complainant approached National Commission.
Defense :
1. The Doctors and Hospital refuted all the allegations. It was contended that the patient was brought in a serious condition and with breathlessness.
2. As the patient was in uremia -renal failure. As a standard protocol, during emergency in renal failure, the doctor advised for hemodialysis. There was no Negligence on thier part.
Held :
1. The National Commission dismissed the appeal and decided in favour of Doctors. The National Commission relied upon the reasoning given by State Commission in its judgment, which really gives solace to Doctors, in these days.
2. The State commission observed that, it is not uncommon that treatment is provided to patients using dialysis process in old age also when age of the patient is more than 80 years or even 90 years. The Dialysis may improve the condition of the patient.
"Golden Words of solace for Doctors :"
3. There is no doubt of any type in this regard that medical profession is a noble profession. People involved in the medical profession, more particularly the doctors command respect in our Society.
At the same time, expectations of the public persons are also much more from the doctors than the other institutions and sections of the Society.
In fact, a doctor cannot give complete assurance and guarantee to save life of a patient.
Certainly for a patient process of treatment is a question of life and death. In this way, a doctor is required to be more and more careful at the time of treatment of a patient.
A little negligence on the part of a doctor can make life of a patient hell. A doctor can help a patient by providing him best possible medicines/treatment.
Sometimes, mistake may also be possible on the part of a doctor also at the time of treatment.
After all, a doctor is also a human being. Working of a doctor cannot be expected like a machine or a computer.
4. The National Commission held that it was a case of anaemia and renal failure, hypertension, diabetes mellitus and ischemic heart disease. The patient could pass very small amount of urine despite administration of injection Lasix and there was no improvement in the health of the patient. Hence, the decision for hemodialysis was taken.
5. IT was observed that evidently, the death of the patient was not due to negligence or deficiency, it was caused by uremia leading to renal failure. There is nothing to show that the doctor did not exercise the reasonable care and the requisite diligence.
Comments
Post a Comment