Medical negligence: Coverage of the profession, duties, ethics, case law, and enlightened defense - A legal perspective (2022)

  • Journal List
  • Indian J Urol
  • v.25(3); Jul-Sep 2009
  • PMC2779963

Medical negligence: Coverage of the profession, duties, ethics, case law, and enlightened defense - A legal perspective (1)

Indian Journal of UrologyCurrent IssueInstructions for ContributorsSubmit articles

Indian J Urol. 2009 Jul-Sep; 25(3): 372–378.

PMCID: PMC2779963

PMID: 19881134

M. S. Pandit and Shobha Pandit

(Video) Medical Ethics and the Crisis of the Doctor-Patient Relationship in the Early Soviet Union

Author information Copyright and License information Disclaimer

Abstract

A patient approaching a doctor expects medical treatment with all the knowledge and skill that the doctor possesses to bring relief to his medical problem. The relationship takes the shape of a contract retaining the essential elements of tort. A doctor owes certain duties to his patient and a breach of any of these duties gives a cause of action for negligence against the doctor. The doctor has a duty to obtain prior informed consent from the patient before carrying out diagnostic tests and therapeutic management. The services of the doctors are covered under the provisions of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 and a patient can seek redressal of grievances from the Consumer Courts. Case laws are an important source of law in adjudicating various issues of negligence arising out of medical treatment.

Keywords: Error of judgment, medical negligence, prior informed consent

WHAT IS MEDICAL NEGLIGENCE?

The medical profession is considered a noble profession because it helps in preserving life. We believe life is God given. Thus, a doctor figures in the scheme of God as he stands to carry out His command. A patient generally approaches a doctor/hospital based on his/its reputation. Expectations of a patient are two-fold: doctors and hospitals are expected to provide medical treatment with all the knowledge and skill at their command and secondly they will not do anything to harm the patient in any manner either because of their negligence, carelessness, or reckless attitude of their staff. Though a doctor may not be in a position to save his patient's life at all times, he is expected to use his special knowledge and skill in the most appropriate manner keeping in mind the interest of the patient who has entrusted his life to him. Therefore, it is expected that a doctor carry out necessary investigation or seeks a report from the patient. Furthermore, unless it is an emergency, he obtains informed consent of the patient before proceeding with any major treatment, surgical operation, or even invasive investigation. Failure of a doctor and hospital to discharge this obligation is essentially a tortious liability. A tort is a civil wrong (right in rem) as against a contractual obligation (right in personam) – a breach that attracts judicial intervention by way of awarding damages. Thus, a patient's right to receive medical attention from doctors and hospitals is essentially a civil right. The relationship takes the shape of a contract to some extent because of informed consent, payment of fee, and performance of surgery/providing treatment, etc. while retaining essential elements of tort.

In the case of Dr. Laxman Balkrishna Joshi vs. Dr. Trimbark Babu Godbole and Anr., AIR 1969 SC 128 and A.S.Mittal v. State of U.P., AIR 1989 SC 1570, it was laid down that when a doctor is consulted by a patient, the doctor owes to his patient certain duties which are: (a) duty of care in deciding whether to undertake the case, (b) duty of care in deciding what treatment to give, and (c) duty of care in the administration of that treatment. A breach of any of the above duties may give a cause of action for negligence and the patient may on that basis recover damages from his doctor. In the aforementioned case, the apex court interalia observed that negligence has many manifestations – it may be active negligence, collateral negligence, comparative negligence, concurrent negligence, continued negligence, criminal negligence, gross negligence, hazardous negligence, active and passive negligence, willful or reckless negligence, or negligence per se. Black's Law Dictionary defines negligence per se as “conduct, whether of action or omission, which may be declared and treated as negligence without any argument or proof as to the particular surrounding circumstances, either because it is in violation of statute or valid Municipal ordinance or because it is so palpably opposed to the dictates of common prudence that it can be said without hesitation or doubt that no careful person would have been guilty of it. As a general rule, the violation of a public duty, enjoined by law for the protection of person or property, so constitutes.”

Negligence per se

While deliberating on the absence of basic qualifications of a homeopathic doctor to practice allopathy in Poonam Verma vs. Ashwin Patel and Ors. (1996) 4 SCC 322, the Supreme Court held that a person who does not have knowledge of a particular system of medicine but practices in that system is a quack. Where a person is guilty of negligence per se, no further proof is needed.

Duty on the part of a hospital and doctor to obtain prior consent of a patient

There exists a duty to obtain prior consent (with respect to living patients) for the purpose of diagnosis, treatment, organ transplant, research purposes, disclosure of medical records, and teaching and medico-legal purposes. With respect to the dead in regard to pathological post mortem, medico-legal post mortem, organ transplant (for legal heirs), and for disclosure of medical record, it is important that informed consent of the patient is obtained. Consent can be given in the following ways:

  1. Express Consent: It may be oral or in writing. Though both these categories of consents are of equal value, written consent can be considered as superior because of its evidential value.

  2. Implied Consent: Implied consent may be implied by patient's conduct.

  3. Tacit Consent: Tacit consent means implied consent understood without being stated.

  4. Surrogate consent: This consent is given by family members. Generally, courts have held that consent of family members with the written approval of 2 physicians sufficiently protects a patient's interest.

    (Video) Joint Legislative Public Hearing on 2021 Executive Budget Proposal: Health/Medicaid - 02/25/21

  5. Advance consent, proxy consent, and presumed consent are also used. While the term advance consent is the consent given by patient in advance, proxy consent indicates consent given by an authorized person. As mentioned earlier, informed consent obtained after explaining all possible risks and side effects is superior to all other forms of consent.

The importance of obtaining informed consent

In the case of Samira Kohli vs. Dr. Prabha Manchanda and Ors. I (2008) CPJ 56 (SC), the apex court held that consent given for diagnostic and operative laparoscopy and “laporotomy if needed” does not amount to consent for a total hysterectomy with bilateral salpingo opherectomy. The appellant was neither a minor nor mentally challenged or incapacitated. As the patient was a competent adult, there was no question of someone else giving consent on her behalf. The appellant was temporarily unconscious under anesthesia, and as there was no emergency. The respondent should have waited until the appellant regained consciousness and gave proper consent. The question of taking the patient's mother's consent does not arise in the absence of emergency. Consent given by her mother is not a valid or real consent. The question was not about the correctness of the decision to remove reproductive organs but failure to obtain consent for removal of the reproductive organs as performance of surgery without taking consent amounts to an unauthorized invasion and interference with the appellant's body. The respondent was denied the entire fee charged for the surgery and was directed to pay Rs. 25000/- as compensation for the unauthorized surgery.

Coverage of doctors and hospitals under CPA

In the case of the Indian Medical Association vs. V.P. Shanta and Ors., III (1995) CPJ 1 (SC), the Supreme Court finally decided on the issue of coverage of medical profession within the ambit of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 so that all ambiguity on the subject was cleared. With this epoch making decision, doctors and hospitals became aware of the fact that as long as they have paid patients, all patients are consumers even if treatment is given free of charge. While the above mentioned apex court decision recognizes that a small percentage of patients may not respond to treatment, medical literature speaks of such failures despite all the proper care and proper treatment given by doctors and hospitals. Failure of family planning operations is a classic example. The apex court does not favor saddling medical men with ex gratia awards. Similarly, a in a few landmark decisions of the National Commission dealing with hospital death, the National Commission has recognized the possibility of hospital death despite there being no negligence.

WHERE COMPENSATION WAS AWARDED

In this context, it may be recalled that in the case of the State of Haryana and Ors v. Smt. Santra, I (2000) CPJ 53 (SC) (by S. Saghir Ahmad and D.P.Wadhwa, JJ.), the Supreme Court in a Special Leave Petition upheld the claim for compensation where incomplete sterilization (family planning operation) was held to be defective in service. Smt Santra underwent a family planning operation related only to the right fallopian tube and the left fallopian tube was not touched, which indicates that complete sterilization operation was not performed. A poor laborer woman, who already had many children and had opted for sterilization, became pregnant and ultimately gave birth to a female child in spite of a sterilization operation that had obviously failed.

Claim for damages was based on the principle that if a person has committed civil wrong, he must pay compensation by way of damages to the person wronged. The apex court held: “Maintenance” would obviously include provision for food, clothing, residence, education of the children and medical attendance or treatment. The obligation to maintain besides being statutory in nature is also personal in the sense that it arises from the very existence of the relationship between a parent and the child. Claim for damages, on the contrary, is based on the principle that if a person has committed civil wrong, he must pay compensation by way of damages to the person wronged.

While elaborating on medical negligence, the apex court observed as follows (abridged): Negligence is a ‘tort’. Every doctor who enters into the medical profession has a duty to act with a reasonable degree of care and skill. This is what is known as ‘implied undertaking’ by a member of the medical profession that he would use a fair, reasonable and competent degree of skill. In the case of Bolam V. Friern Hospital Management Committee, (1957) 2 All ER 118, McNair, J. summed up the law as the following:

“The test is the standard of the ordinary skilled man exercising and professing to have that special skill. A man need not possess the highest expert skill: It is well established law that it is sufficient if he exercises the ordinary skill of an ordinary competent man exercising that particular art. In the case of a medical man, negligence means failure to act in accordance with the standards of reasonably competent medical men at the time. There may be one or more perfectly proper standards, and if he confirms with one of these proper standards, then he is not negligent.”

In the case of Spring Meadows Hospital and Anr. v Harjol Ahluwalia, 1998 4 SCC 39, a compensation of Rs. 5 lacs was awarded because of mental anguish caused to the parents of a child who became totally incapacitated for life in addition to a compensation of Rs. 12 lacs approx. awarded to the child. While the amount of Rs. 12 lacs was to be paid by insurer, the balance amount was to be paid by the hospital. Though the insurance company took a stand since the nurse who administered the adult dose of inj. Lariago to the child was not qualified, the apex court did not go into this issue while adjudicating negligence related proceeding. Therefore, it is important to keep in mind that doctors and hospitals should not only obtain a Professional Indemnity Insurance Policy, but also take care that nurses and other hospitals staff engaged by it are qualified.

MEDICAL ETHICS AND THE TREATMENT OF ACCIDENT VICTIMS

In the case of Pravat Kumar Mukherjee vs. Ruby General Hospital and Ors, II(2005)CPJ35(NC), the National Commission delivered a landmark decision concerning treatment of an accident victim by the hospital. The brief facts of the case are as follows: the complainants are the parents of the deceased boy. They approached the National Commission for compensation and adequate relief. The case involves the unfortunate death of a young boy, Shri Sumanta Mukherjee, a student of second year B. Tech., Electrical Engineering. At Netaji Subhash Chandra Bose Engineering College on January 14, 2001 a bus from Calcutta Tramway Corporation crashed with the motorcycle driven by the deceased. Sumanta was conscious after the accident and was taken to the hospital about 1 km from the site of the accident. He was insured for Rs. 65,000/- under a Mediclaim Policy issued by the New India Assurance Co. Ltd. When he reached the hospital, the deceased was conscious and showed the Mediclaim certificate he was carrying in his wallet. He also assured that charges for treatment would be paid and treatment should be started. Acting on this promise, the hospital started treatment in its emergency room by giving moist oxygen, starting suction, and by administering injection Driphylline, Injection Lycotinx, and titanous toxoid. The respondents demanded an immediate payment of Rs. 15000/- and discontinued treatment as the amount was not deposited immediately though an assurance to pay the amount was made by the accompanying persons from the general public. Actually, the crowd collected Rs. 2000/- and the amount with the motorcycle of the patient and insurance receipt was offered. As the hospital was adamant and discontinued treatment after giving treatment for 45 minutes, the people from the crowd present were forced to take the patient to National Calcutta Medical College, which is about 7-8 km from the current hospital. The patient died on the way and was declared dead upon arrival at the National Calcutta Medical College.

The National Commission allowed the complaint and the Opponent Ruby Hospital was directed to pay Rs. 10 lakhs to the Complainant for mental pain agony. The Commission observed as follows: “This may serve the purpose of bringing about a qualitative change in the attitude of the hospitals of providing service to human beings as human beings. A human touch is necessary; that is their code of conduct; that is their duty and that is what is required to be implemented. In emergency or critical cases, let them discharge their duty/social obligation of rendering service without waiting for fee or for consent”. However, it remains to be seen whether the above award has brought in any attitudinal change in the medical fraternity.

An award was given on the following basis/grounds. While dealing with the contention that ‘no consideration paid’, ‘deceased or complainant not consumer’ National Commission observed as follows (abridged): “Not acceptable. Persons belonging to the poor class who are provided service free of charge are beneficiaries of service which is hired or availed of by the paying class. The status of an emergency or critically ill patient would be the same as people belonging to the poor class since both are not in a position to pay. Free services would also be services and the recipient would be the consumer under the Act. Since doctors started treatment on the deceased due to an emergency, that itself is availing of services, may it be free of cost or promised deferred payment. Expert evidence pointed out that discontinuance of treatment hastened the death of the patient, which itself is deficiency in service. Serious negligence and laxity on the part of the hospital by refusing admission and treatment facility to the youth who was almost in dying condition, defying all medical ethics and a gross violation of the Clinical Establishment rules and Act of 1950 as amended in 1998. How was a patient who was advised admission at ITU was allowed to leave the hospital for treatment elsewhere without signing any document or risk bond not shown? Withdrawal of treatment can not be justified on any ground. Deficiency is writ large.

Secondly, while dealing with the contention that there was no consent for treatment, the National Commission observed as follows (abridged): “Since emergency treatment is required to be given to a patient who was brought in seriously injured condition there was no question of waiting for consent. Consent is implicit in such cases. On the contrary, a surgeon who fails to perform an emergency operation must prove that the patient refused to undergo an operation not only at the initial stage but even after he was informed about the dangerous consequences of not undergoing the operation. Waiting for consent of a patient or a passer-by who brought the patient to the hospital is nothing but absurd and is apparent failure of duty on the part of doctor. Deficiency in service was proved and compensation was granted.

Maintainability of a consumer case when a Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (MACT) case is pending: The National Commission held that the MACT case is no bar to complaint under CP Act. Two causes are different and required to be decided by separate tribunals/forums. While the cause of action before MACT was rash and negligent driving, due to which the accident was caused, the cause of action against doctors and hospitals is for deficiency in rendering service – emergency treatment by the doctors or the hospital. Since both causes are separate and distinct, complaint is maintainable.

(Video) Day three of Brett Kavanaugh’s Supreme Court confirmation hearing

THE IMPORTANCE OF CASE LAW

Jurisprudential principle of ‘stare decisis’ is based on a Latin phrase meaning to stand by decided cases; to uphold precedents; to maintain the positions laid down by higher courts earlier. One of the important characteristics of a good law is that the law should be definite, lucid, and unambiguous with the flexibility to relate to different situations, facts, and circumstances and that justice is done in accordance with law. Latin maxim ‘Stare decisis, et non quieta movere’ means it is best to adhere to decisions and not to disturb questions put at rest. The objective is to avoid confusion in the minds of the citizens as to what the law of the land is. As laid down in u.a 141 of the constitution of India, the law declared by the Supreme Court is binding in all courts. Furthermore, the Constitution of India provides that both the Supreme Court and High Courts of States are the courts of records. So far as the case law laid down by the National Commission and State Commission is concerned, they are followed by lower fora as a binding precedent though no specific provision has been made in the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. It is generally accepted that when a point of law is settled by a decision of a superior authority, it is not to be departed from. Change of a judge shall not affect the settled legal position. A new judge is not supposed to pronounce a new law but is expected to maintain and expound the old one. While this appears to restrict the elbow room of new judges to interpret the law when there is a settled legal position laid down by his predecessor, this restriction is substantially lifted when the law undergoes amendment. There is considerable criticism that Consumer Fora have not scrupulously followed the principle laid down by superior fora, that is State Commissions of the state and the National Commission and also that even superior fora have often not maintained settled positions laid down by their predecessors. The decisions of the National Commission and State Commissions are reported. However, there may not be uniformity with all such decisions. Furthermore, there may be conflicting decisions of various State Commissions and National Commissions. Consequently, while some legal experts have called for express provision to that effect, others feel that the principle being followed in respect of the Supreme Court and High Courts (since an appeal to Supreme Court is provided, High Courts are generally not expected to entertain consumer related writs though there is no such bar in the Act) may be generally followed even in respect of the decisions of State and National Commission subject to the interpretations if any of High Courts and the final legal position as laid down by Supreme Court.

Clear case of medical negligence (similar to res ipsa loquitor?)

An appellant doctor was found by the State Commission to be responsible for leaving ribbon gauze in the right side of the nose after a septoplasty resulting in several complications. The complainant suffered and had to be under treatment all the while the National Commission confirmed the order and observed that it has no option but to deduce that it was a clear case of medical negligence on the part of the appellant. The National Commission in the case of Dr. Ravishankar vs. Jery K. Thomas and Anr, II (2006) CPJ 138 (NC) held that based on the facts and circumstances, the obvious deduction is that the appellant doctor is responsible for leaving behind ribbon gauze resulting in complications. Medical negligence was proved.

The brief facts of the case are as follows. The complainant was having some nasal and breathing problems. He approached the appellant doctor who upon examination advised a septoplasty, which was carried out on August 18, 1999 in second Respondent's hospital. It is the case of the complainant that after the operation, the pain aggravated and the breathing problem persisted. After examination, the complainant was advised to take some antibiotics for major nasal infection. Despite taking these medicines, the complainant was not getting any relief so he was taken to St. John's Hospital. A computed tomography (CT) scan showed that there was a deposit inside the nasal cavity for which an endoscopy was performed at St. John's hospital. Cotton gauze was removed from the nasal section on November 28, 2000. It was in these circumstances alleging medical negligence on the part of appellant and second respondent a complaint was filed before the State Commission. After hearing perusal of evidence and other material on record, the State Commission held the second respondent guilty of medical negligence and directed him to pay a compensation of Rs. 1 lac with interest @ 6% p.a from the date of complaint along with the cost of Rs. 5000/-. Aggrieved by this order, the Appellant doctor filed this appeal.

Held: heard the counsel for the appellant. As held by the State Commission, it is neither the surgery nor the procedure adopted that is under challenge. What is being challenged is the leaving behind of cotton gauze after surgery and the non removal of it by the appellant doctor. After going through the record maintained at St. John's hospital, Dr. Balasubramanium opined that after the CT scan a soft tissue mass (gauze piece) was found retained in the right nasal cavity that was removed under local anesthesia.

CONCLUSION

In these circumstances, deduction is obvious that it was the appellant who was responsible for leaving behind ribbon gauze in the right side of the nose after the septoplasty performed by him on August 18, 1999 resulting in several complications. Because of this, the complainant suffered and had to be under treatment leaving us with no option but to deduce that it was a clear case of medical negligence on the part of the appellant.

MEDICO LEGAL – SOME IMPORTANT ISSUES

The death of a patient while undergoing treatment does not amount to medical negligence.

In the case of Dr. Ganesh Prasad and Anr. V. Lal Janamajay Nath Shahdeo, I (2006) CPJ 117 (NC), the National Commission (Order: Per Mrs. Rajalaxmi Rao, Member) reiterated the principle that where proper treatment is given, death occurring due to process of disease and its complication, it can not be held that doctors and hospitals are negligent and orders of lower fora do not uphold the claim and award a compensation. In this case, a 4 ½ year old child suffering from cerebral malaria was admitted to the hospital. A life-saving injection was given. As opined by the child specialist, doses were safe and the treatment was proper. Though the death of the child is unfortunate, it can not be said that there was negligence on the part of the doctor.

The opinion based on teachings of one school of thought may not amount to medical negligence when there are two responsible schools of thought. Observations of the National Commission in the case of Dr. Subramanyam and Anr. vs. Dr. B. Krishna Rao and Anr., II (1996) CPJ 233 (NC) on the question of medical negligence are most illuminating as it involved a complaint by a well-qualified doctor against a fellow professional who treated his wife for an endoscopic sclerotherapy. It is relevant to note that in this case the complainant doctor alleged that the moment the patient was admitted to the Nursing Home, there was total mismanagement to the extent of virtually throwing her into the jaws of death solely because of negligence and improper rather wrong treatment given to her by the first opposite party, Dr. Rao. The complainants submitted that the slipshod, callous, and negligent way in which the patient was treated led to her death. Hon'ble Commission observed as follows: “The principles regarding medical negligence are well settled. A doctor can be held guilty of medical negligence only when he falls short of the standard of reasonable medical care. A doctor can not be found negligent merely because in a matter of opinion he made an error of judgment. It is also well settled that when there are genuinely two responsible schools of thought about management of a clinical situation the court could do no greater disservice to the community or advancement of medical science than to place the hallmark of legality upon one form of treatment.”

Error of judgment in diagnosis or failure to cure a disease does not necessarily mean medical negligence. In the case of Dr. Kunal Saha vs. Dr. Sukumar Mukherjee and Ors. III (2006) CPJ 142 (NC), the National Commission (per Mr. Justice M. B. Shah, President) considered the question of whether the Opponent doctors and hospital acted negligently in diagnosis of the disease suffered by the patient (wife of complainant doctor), administration of medicine (it was alleged that an overdose of steroids was prescribed), provision of facilities in hospital (absence of burn unit in hospital was alleged). A compensation of Rs. 77,76,73,500/- was claimed. The National Commission held that an error in medical diagnosis does not amount to deficiency in service. The National Commission further observed that the deceased (wife of Complainant) suffered from TEN (Toxic Epidermal Necrolysis), which is a rare disease and the mortality rate varies from 25% to 70% as per medical literature. The Commission also observed that considering the facts and circumstances of this case, the doctor can not be held liable for want of an exact diagnosis.

Role of expert opinion: in the case of Sethuraman Subramniam Iyer vs. Triveni Nursing Home and Anr. I (1998) CPJ 110 (NC), the National Commission dismissed the complaint holding that there was no expert evidence on behalf of the complainant. Similarly, in ABGP vs. Jog Hospital, the complaint was held to be not maintainable. In Farangi lal Mutneja vs. Shri Guru Harkishan Sahib Eye Hospital Sahana and Anr., IV (2006) CPJ 96, Union Territory Commission, Chandigarh dismissed the claim based on medical negligence with following observation: “The O.P. conducted an eye operation upon the complainant. The cornea was damaged subsequently, and visibility was lost. The complainant alleged that proper dilation of an eye was not done before conducting the cataract operation. Also it was alleged that the operation was done in a hurried manner. The Medical Council of India, after obtaining the expert opinion of two well known institutions, came to the conclusion that standard treatment protocol was followed and optimal procedures were carried out. Thus there was no negligence on the part of the O.P.”

Medical Literature: In the case of P. Venkata Lakshmi vs. Dr. Y. Savita Devi, II (2004) CPJ 14 (NC), the National Commission held that the State Commission ought to have considered the medical literature filed by the complainant and the State Commission had dismissed the complaint on the grounds that there was no expert evidence and remanded the matter.

Quantum of compensation: With regard to the quantum of compensation payable to an injured patient, the Supreme Court observed in the case of IMA vs. V.P. Shanta and Ors. III (1995) CPJ I (SC), as follows: “A patient who has been injured by an act of medical negligence has suffered in a way which is recognized by the law – and by the public at large as deserving compensation. This loss may be continuing and what may seem like an unduly large award may be little more than that sum which is required to compensate him for such matters as loss of future earnings and the future cost of medical or nursing care. To deny a legitimate claim or to restrict arbitrarily the size of an award would amount to substantial injustice. After all, there is no difference in legal theory between the plaintiff injured through medical negligence and the plaintiff injured in an industrial or motor accident.”

Engaging a specialist when available is obligatory. In the case of Prashanth S. Dhananka vs. Nizam Institute of Medical Science and Ors (1999) CPJ43 (NC), the National Commission deliberated on important issues such as what constitutes medical negligence, the duty of a hospital to engage a specialist when a specialist is available, vicarious liability of a hospital for omissions and commissions of doctors and staff, and compensation for mental and physical torture.

(Video) Trump impeached after historic vote | NBC News (Live Stream Recording)

The National Commission on the question of whether compensation has to be awarded when doctors decide not to operate and the patient later dies. In the case of Narasimha Reddy and Ors. Vs. Rohini Hospital and Anr. I (2006) CPJ144 (NC), the National Commission held that when a patient could not be operated due to a critical condition, the doctor can not be held guilty of negligence if the proper course of practice is adopted and reasonable care is taken in administration of treatment. Consequently the Revision petition filed by the complainant was dismissed.

When a patient does not give a proper medical history, the doctor can not be blamed for the consequences. In the case of S. Tiwari vs. Dr. Pranav 1(1996) CPJ 301 (NC), it was alleged that a tooth was extracted without a proper test. When bleeding continued, the doctor administered a pain killer. Though the patient had a blood pressure of 130/90, he did not give the doctor his proper medical history. The National Commission upheld the findings of the State Commission and dismissed the complaint on the ground that the patient did not give a correct case history and follow-up when required.

Hospital is vicariously liable for any wrong claiming on the part of consultants. In the case of Ms Neha Kumari and Anr. V Apollo Hospital and Ors. 1 (2003) CPJ 145 (NC), the National Commission held that alleged medical negligence is not proved as the complainant suffered from complex birth defects of the spine and whole body as evidenced by a pre-operative CT scan. Two complaints were filed claiming a compensation of Rs. 26,90,000 alleging that while performing an operation (surgery) on the spinal canal, a rod was fitted inappropriately at the wrong level that resulted in the non functioning of the lower limbs. The Hon'ble commission held as follows:

“We do not find it is a case of medical negligence as alleged. Complaints have not denied that Neha Kumari was suffering from ailments from the very birth and that she was operated upon when she was only four years of age. On detailed investigations Neha Kumari was found to have multiple congenital complicated problems in Kiphoscoliotic deformity with weakness and wasting right upper limbs and (i) complex Khyphoscoliotic deformity of the mid dorsal spine with hemivertibrae of the D and D6 spinal levels and spinal bifida of the D and D7 vertebrae….Further filing of the appeal was delayed and no sufficient cause was shown to the satisfaction of Commission.

However, on the question of vicarious liability of the hospital for negligence on the part of the consultants, the Hon'ble Commission relying on the judgment in Basant Seth V Regency Hospital O P No.99 of 1994 rejected the contention of the hospital and held that the hospital is vicariously liable for any wrong claiming on the part of consultants.

Award of ex-gratia compensation against doctors and hospitals is not proper. The decision of the Supreme Court in the State of Punjab vs. Shiv Ram and Ors., IV (2005) CPJ 14 (SC) on a complaint alleging an unsuccessful family planning operation due to negligence of the doctor can be said to be an important milestone for many reasons. Firstly, the Supreme Court held that medical men and hospitals should not be saddled with damages unless they are found negligent. The apex court felt that awarding ex gratia compensation against doctors and hospitals without any findings on negligence is not proper. The court further held that there is a need for developing a welfare fund or insurance scheme. Failure of sterilization performed successfully is attributable to causes other than medical negligence and that the state government should think of devising and making provisions for a welfare fund or collaborating with insurance companies.

This judgment makes very pragmatic observations in the midst of several verdicts against medical professionals and hospitals especially when an award is made based on sympathetic considerations. It is heartening to note that the apex court looks at the issues relating to the medical profession and medical negligence in a holistic manner and with utmost consideration.

In a full bench decision dated August 25, 2005, Mr. Justice R.C. Lahoti, former C.J.I observed as follows: “Medical profession is one of the oldest professions of the world and is the most humanitarian one. There is no better service than to serve the suffering, wounded, and the sick. Inherent in the concept of any profession is a code of conduct, containing the basic ethics that underline the moral values that govern the professional practice and is aimed at upholding its dignity. Medical ethics underlines the values at the heart of the practitioner-client relationship. In the recent times, professionals are developing a tendency to forget that the self regulation which is at the heart of their profession is a privilege and not a right and the profession obtains this privilege in return for an implicit contract with society to provide good, competent and accountable service to the public. It must always be kept in mind that a doctor is a noble profession and the aim must be to serve humanity, otherwise the dignified profession will lose its true worth.”

The apex court further held that merely because a woman having undergone a sterilization operation became pregnant and delivered a child, the operating surgeon or his employer can not be held liable for payment of compensation on account of unwanted pregnancy or child. A claim in tort is sustainable only if there was negligence on the part of surgeon in performance of a surgery or the surgeon assured 100% exclusion of pregnancy after surgery. Proof of negligence will have to satisfy Bolam's test. Cause of failure of the sterilization operation may be obtained from laparoscopic inspection of the uterine tubes, by an X-ray examination, or by a pathological examination of the material removed at a subsequent operation of re-sterilization. The cause of action in the failed sterilization operation arises on account of negligence of the surgeon and not on account of child birth-failure due to natural causes.

The apex court reaffirmed the above observations in the State of Haryana and Ors. vs. Raj Rani IV (2005) CPJ28 (SC) and held as follows: “Doctors can be held liable only in cases where failure of operation is attributable to his negligence and not otherwise. Medical negligence recognized percentage of failure of sterilization operation due to natural causes depending on techniques chosen for performing surgery. The pregnancy can be for reasons de hors any negligence of the surgeon. A fallopian tube that is cut and sealed may reunite and the woman may conceive though a surgery is performed. Neither can the surgeons can be held liable to pay compensation nor can the state be held vicariously liable in such cases. However, payment made by the state will be held as ex gratia payment and the money paid to the poor will not be recovered.”

Footnotes

Source of Support: Nil

Conflict of Interest: None declared.

Articles from Indian Journal of Urology : IJU : Journal of the Urological Society of India are provided here courtesy of Wolters Kluwer -- Medknow Publications

FAQs

What is the most common example of negligence? ›

Incorrect medication prescriptions or administration of drugs is one of the most common cases of medical negligence reported. This can occur when a patient is prescribed the wrong drug for their illness, receives another patient's medication or receives an incorrect dosage of medication.

What is a doctors duty of care? ›

Listen to, and respond to, their concerns and preferences. Give patients the information they want or need in a way they can understand. Respect patients' right to reach decisions with you about their treatment and care. Support patients in caring for themselves to improve and maintain their health.

How do I claim compensation for medical negligence? ›

Steps to making a medical negligence claim
  1. Contact us. The first step to making a medical negligence claim is to get in touch with us. ...
  2. Make a complaint. ...
  3. Gather evidence to prove medical negligence in a case. ...
  4. The case is taken to court.

How are doctors ethically bound to act with regard to communicating information to patients? ›

Doctors are under both ethical and legal duties to protect patients' personal information from improper disclosure. But appropriate information sharing is an essential part of the provision of safe and effective care.

What are the 4 defenses to negligence? ›

4 Elements of a Negligence Claim (and more)
  • The existence of a legal duty to the plaintiff;
  • The defendant breached that duty;
  • The plaintiff was injured; and,
  • The defendant's breach of duty caused the injury.

What are the 3 defenses against negligence? ›

The most common negligence defenses are contributory negligence, comparative negligence, and assumption of risk.

What are the 4 elements of negligence in healthcare? ›

To do so, four legal elements must be proven: (1) a professional duty owed to the patient; (2) breach of such duty; (3) injury caused by the breach; and (4) resulting damages.

What are the 4 responsibilities of duty of care? ›

Duty of Care is about individual wellbeing , welfare, compliance and good practice.

What is medical negligence in law? ›

The term “medical negligence” is an omnibus one, which has come in vogue to refer to wrongful actions or omissions of professionals in the field of medicine, in pursuit of their profession, while dealing with patients. It is not a term defined or referred to anywhere in any of the enacted Indian laws.

What is the most common reason for medical negligence claims? ›

Multiple studies have concluded that misdiagnosis is the most common cause of malpractice claims. Misdiagnosis includes failure to diagnose a medical problem that exists or making a diagnosis that is incorrect.

Do medical negligence claims go to court? ›

The vast majority of medical negligence cases are resolved without going to Court, even where Court proceedings have been commenced. The Court strongly encourages early settlement of cases and there are plenty of opportunities to negotiate settlement of your medical claim.

What are the relief available in case of medical negligence? ›

a) Compensatory action: seeking monetary compensation before the Civil Courts, High Court or the Consumer Dispute Redressal Forum under the Constitutional Law, Law of Torts/Law of Contract and the Consumer Protection Act. b) Punitive action: filing a criminal complaint against the doctor under the Indian Penal Code.

What are the 7 principles of medical ethics? ›

This approach – focusing on the application of seven mid-level principles to cases (non-maleficence, beneficence, health maximisation, efficiency, respect for autonomy, justice, proportionality) – is presented in this paper. Easy to use 'tools' applying ethics to public health are presented.

What are the top 5 ethical issues in healthcare? ›

5 Ethical Issues in Healthcare
  • Do-Not-Resuscitate Orders. ...
  • Doctor and Patient Confidentiality. ...
  • Malpractice and Negligence. ...
  • Access to Care. ...
  • Physician-Assisted Suicide.

What are the legal and ethical considerations for healthcare professionals? ›

Ethical Issues in Healthcare
  • Patient Privacy and Confidentiality. The protection of private patient information is one of the most important ethical and legal issues in the field of healthcare. ...
  • Transmission of Diseases. ...
  • Relationships. ...
  • End-of-Life Issues.
27 Sept 2022

What are the 5 defenses to negligence? ›

Doing so means you and your lawyer must prove the five elements of negligence: duty, breach of duty, cause, in fact, proximate cause, and harm. Your lawyer may help you meet the elements necessary to prove your claim, build a successful case, and help you receive the monetary award you deserve.

What are the 5 defences of negligence? ›

Legal defences to negligence—STUDENT TEXT

The defendant bears the onus for proving any defence. Defences can include: obvious risk • inherent risk • voluntary assumption of risk • dangerous recreational activity • exclusion of liability • illegality • inevitable accidents • contributory negligence.

What are the 3 key principles of defenses in a malpractice lawsuit? ›

The key elements of every type of medical malpractice claim, whether it's for birth injuries or injuries to children and adults, are: The physician owed the patient a duty of care. The physician violated the standard of competent care. The lack of competent care causes the patient injuries or death.

What are the 5 justification defenses? ›

Identify the elements required for justification defenses (Self-Defense, Defense of Others, Defense of Habitation, Necessity) Identify the elements required for excuse defenses (Insanity, Infancy, Diminished Capacity, Intoxication, Duress)

What are the 2 defences for negligence? ›

There are two specific defences that are particularly appropriate here: volenti non fit injuria (voluntary assumption of a risk) and contributory negligence. The distinction between volenti and contributory negligence is clearly important.

What is the best defense for negligence? ›

The most common negligence defenses are contributory negligence, comparative negligence, and assumption of risk. Contributory negligence is applicable in circumstances where the injury occurs and both the plaintiff and the defendant are at fault.

What are the 4 C's of medical malpractice prevention? ›

Start by practicing good risk management, building on the old adage of four Cs: compassion, communication, competence and charting.

What are the six categories of negligence? ›

The categories of negligence are: failure to follow standards of care, failure to use equipment in a responsible manner, failure to communicate, failure to document, failure to assess and monitor, and failure to act as a patient advocate (see S ix Major Categories of Negligence That Result in Malpractice Lawsuits, page ...

What are the three main elements required to establish a claim in negligence? ›

Negligence—what are the key ingredients to establish a claim in negligence?
  • duty of care.
  • breach of that duty.
  • damage (which is caused by the breach)
  • foreseeability of such damage.

What are the 5 duties of care? ›

Duty to Care is actually an umbrella term that encompasses the following areas: Inclusion, Diversity, Mental Health, Well-being and Safeguarding.

What are 3 duty of care responsibilities for workers? ›

While at work a worker must: take reasonable care for their own health and safety. take reasonable care for the health and safety of others. comply with any reasonable instructions, policies and procedure given by their employer, business or controller of the workplace.

What is the main function of duty of care in negligence? ›

You must take reasonable care to avoid acts or omissions which you can reasonably foresee would be likely to injure your neighbour.

What is an example of negligence in a medical practice? ›

Failure to diagnose. Surgical errors or unnecessary surgery. Prescribing the wrong medication. Disregarding or failing to consider appropriate patient history.

What is negligence in medical ethics? ›

Negligence is defined as “the failure to use such care as a reasonably prudent and careful person would use under similar circumstances” (Black, 1990, p. 1032).

Is medical negligence a tort or crime? ›

The concept of medical negligence has undergone a major transformation from being a crime to a tort. Today, medical negligence means negligence on the part of the doctor to act in accordance with medical standards in vogue, being practiced by an ordinarily reasonably competent man practicing the same art.

What are the 4 common errors that could lead to a medical malpractice lawsuit? ›

Failing to evaluate a patient's medical history to identify possible complications. Failing to tell the patient critical preoperative instructions, such as not eating or drinking before the procedure. Administering too much anesthesia. Improperly placing the breathing tube.

What are the factors to prove medical negligence? ›

Essentials of medical negligence
  • The defendant owed a duty of care to the plaintiff.
  • The defendant made a breach of that duty.
  • The plaintiff suffered damage as a consequence of that breach.
3 Aug 2019

What are the three 3 elements that must be satisfied for a claim of negligence to be upheld? ›

To make a claim of negligence in NSW, you must prove three elements: A duty of care existed between you and the person you are claiming was negligent; The other person breached their duty of care owed to you; and. Damage or injury suffered by you was caused by the breach of the duty.

Is medical negligence civil law? ›

Negligence arising from medical acts may result in a civil action by the injured party (claimant) or a criminal prosecution by the state.

What court would hear a negligence cases? ›

The King's Bench Division deals with cases involving: personal injury. clinical negligence. professional negligence.

How do you know if you have a case for medical negligence? ›

The Claimant needs to show that as a result of the breach of duty by the medical professional he failed to recover from his condition or reduced the chances of him recovering from. In the alternative they need to show that the original condition/injury has become worse due to the treatment that they have received.

What are the 5 theories of ethics in healthcare? ›

These are: utilitarianism, deontology, virtue ethics and principlism. Understanding different ethical theories can have a number of significant benefits, which have the potential to shape and inform the care of patients, challenge bad practice and lead staff to become better informed about areas of moral disagreement.

What are the 12 ethical principles of ethics? ›

The 12 ethical principles for business executives
  • HONESTY. All personnel must be committed to telling the truth in all forms of communication and in all actions. ...
  • FAIRNESS. ...
  • LEADERSHIP. ...
  • INTEGRITY. ...
  • COMPASSION. ...
  • RESPECT. ...
  • RESPONSIBILITY. ...
  • LOYALTY.
8 Nov 2022

What are the 8 guiding principles of healthcare ethics? ›

The final Washington e-Health Code of Ethics sets forth guiding principles under eight main headings: candor; honesty; quality; informed consent; privacy; professionalism in online health care; responsible partnering; and accountability.

What are the 4 basic principles of healthcare ethics? ›

The four principles of Beauchamp and Childress - autonomy, non-maleficence, beneficence and justice - have been extremely influential in the field of medical ethics, and are fundamental for understanding the current approach to ethical assessment in health care.

What are 3 legal and ethical issues that occur with end of life patient? ›

These issues include patients' decision-making capacity and right to refuse treatment; withholding and withdrawing life-sustaining treatment, including nutrition and hydration; "no code" decisions; medical futility; and assisted suicide.

What are the legal responsibilities of a healthcare professional? ›

Legal responsibilities are based on law and they must be followed. Federal, state and local governments enforce the laws. Healthcare workers must follow any laws that affect healthcare and they must also know and follow state laws that regulate their license or registration.

Why is it important to know your legal and ethical responsibilities in healthcare? ›

They are expected to do what is best for the patient or consumer and make the right choices when providing care. Unethical behaviors or illegal practices can lead to poor patient outcomes and loss of trust.

Why are legal and ethical issues important in healthcare? ›

Laws are designed to prevent harm to others while protecting the rights of individuals. As a healthcare worker it is your duty to care and that if you breach that duty and someone is injured as a result of that breach, there will be a penalty to pay.

What are some examples of negligence? ›

Examples of negligence include: A driver who runs a stop sign causing an injury crash. A store owner who fails to put up a “Caution: Wet Floor” sign after mopping up a spill. A property owner who fails to replace rotten steps on a wooden porch that collapses and injures visiting guests.

What is common negligence? ›

Probably one of the most common types of personal injury lawsuits involves a claim of negligence. Negligence describes a situation in which a person acts in a careless (or "negligent") manner, which results in someone else getting hurt or property being damaged.

What are some examples of negligence cases? ›

  • Ganesh vs Syed Munned Ahamed And Ors. ...
  • Shri Uttam Sarkar vs The Management Of Tura Christian ... ...
  • Jacob Mathew vs State Of Punjab & Anr on 5 August, 2005. ...
  • V. ...
  • Balram Prasad vs Kunal Saha & Ors on 24 October, 2013. ...
  • Smt. ...
  • Jang Bahadur Singh vs Sunder Lal Mandal And Ors. ...
  • Kusum Sharma & Ors vs Batra Hospital &Med.Research ...

What is the most common negligence tort? ›

The most common type of negligence tort case is a car accident situation. All motorists have a legal duty to provide for other motorists' and pedestrians' care.

What are the 5 components of a negligence case? ›

Doing so means you and your lawyer must prove the five elements of negligence: duty, breach of duty, cause, in fact, proximate cause, and harm.

What 3 elements must be present to prove negligence? ›

Four elements are required to establish a prima facie case of negligence:
  • the existence of a legal duty that the defendant owed to the plaintiff.
  • defendant's breach of that duty.
  • plaintiff's sufferance of an injury.
  • proof that defendant's breach caused the injury (typically defined through proximate cause)

What is a professional negligence called? ›

Professional negligence is also termed malpractice. It occurs when a professional breaches a duty to a client (see also negligence).

What are the two types of causation for negligence? ›

Factual (or actual) cause and proximate cause are the two elements of causation in tort law.
  • Factual cause is often established using the but-for-test. ...
  • Proximate causation refers to a cause that is legally sufficient to find the defendant liable.

What is professional negligence give an example? ›

Professional Negligence can be a somewhat confusing term but essentially, it is when a professional, for example a solicitor or barrister, surveyor, accountant, architect, independent financial adviser, has failed to perform a job for their client/customer to the required standard.

What are the four common errors that could lead to a medical malpractice lawsuit? ›

Failing to evaluate a patient's medical history to identify possible complications. Failing to tell the patient critical preoperative instructions, such as not eating or drinking before the procedure. Administering too much anesthesia. Improperly placing the breathing tube.

Which defense to negligence is the most effective? ›

One of the most commonly used defenses to negligence claims is to show contributory negligence on the part of the plaintiff.

What is the most difficult element of negligence to prove? ›

Many articles discuss what negligence is and how to prove it, but the least understood element among these four is causation. Additionally, out of these four elements, causation is typically the most difficult to prove, especially in medical malpractice cases.

What is the most common Defence in an action in negligence? ›

Number one, you owe no duty of care to the plaintiff. You can show that you did not owe a duty of care to the plaintiff. Then you're off the hook for that negligence claim.

Videos

1. Chapter 19 Liability Risk
(Michael Nugent)
2. The Ethics of Interpretation
(UA Humanities)
3. The Speech-Language Pathology & Audiology & Hearing Aid Dispensers Board Meeting - May 14, 2020
(California Department of Consumer Affairs)
4. Watch NBC News NOW Live - May 28
(NBC News)
5. UMMAA at 100 Symposium - 09/30 Session 2-3
(University of Michigan)
6. When Risks Include a Law Suit: Legal Liability Issues in Outdoor Education
(The Association for Experiential Education)

Top Articles

You might also like

Latest Posts

Article information

Author: Delena Feil

Last Updated: 11/18/2022

Views: 6157

Rating: 4.4 / 5 (45 voted)

Reviews: 92% of readers found this page helpful

Author information

Name: Delena Feil

Birthday: 1998-08-29

Address: 747 Lubowitz Run, Sidmouth, HI 90646-5543

Phone: +99513241752844

Job: Design Supervisor

Hobby: Digital arts, Lacemaking, Air sports, Running, Scouting, Shooting, Puzzles

Introduction: My name is Delena Feil, I am a clean, splendid, calm, fancy, jolly, bright, faithful person who loves writing and wants to share my knowledge and understanding with you.