This article highlights the recent ruling that the Supreme Court affirmed that every hospital-related fatality does not inevitably constitute medical negligence based on the hypothetical assumption of inadequate medical treatment.

The Supreme Court panel of Justice D. Y. Chandrachud, Justice A. S. Bopanna and Justice J. B. Pardiwala rejected a suit accusing a hospital of medical negligence and a lack of service on the grounds that the evidence was not convincingly proven.

Overview

The complainant's spouse was carried into the hospital via the casualty entrance complaining of vomiting, where he again vomited and complained of shortness, according to a petition the complaint filed with the NCDRC. After determining that the patient's arteries were 70% blocked, the physicians provided an injection, after which the patient had cramps and lost consciousness. She claimed that her spouse was transferred to the ICU around midnight and pronounced deceased at 1:06 a.m.

The petitioner alleged that the hospital and employees failed to provide an adequate explanation for the cause of death, failed to maintain sufficient records, and carelessly administered care. In her appeal, she requested compensation of Rs. 7 crores with 18% interest and Rs. 3 crores for mental anguish.

On the other side, the hospital and its employees have refuted the allegations of medical negligence and said that the patient and his wife concealed the fact that he suffered from diabetes. The hospital noted that it and the whole cardiology and critical care team followed the correct protocol. The patient, however, could not be revived and died.

The Supreme Court rejected the appeal, stating,

"Unless the appellants can prove before this Court any particular course of action implying a lack of adequate medical attention and care, it would not be feasible for the Court to second-guess the medical judgment of the physicians on the course of medical treatment delivered to the spouse of the first appellant."

The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission has reviewed the medical negligence complaint's supporting evidence. By its challenged ruling, the NCDRC has dismissed the allegation of lack of medical negligence.

Judgment

The three-judge bench of Justice Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud, Justice A. S. Bopanna and Justice J. B. Pardiwala stated that the Court could not second-guess the medical judgment of the doctors regarding the course of medical treatment administered to the appellant's spouse unless the appellants could demonstrate a specific course of conduct suggesting a lack of due medical attention and care.

In the absence of such evidence showing medical malpractice, the court saw no reason to make a different opinion from that of the NCDRC.

In light of the facts and taking into account the standard established by the Court in its rulings regarding medical negligence, the court rejected the appeal.

Meaning of healthcare mistakes

Medical malpractice occurs when a healthcare practitioner or provider fails to offer proper treatment, fails to take suitable action, or provides poor care that results in the patient's suffering, injury, or death. Medical malpractice occurs when a hospital, doctor, or other health care provider injures a patient by a careless act or omission. The carelessness may have resulted from mistakes in diagnosis, treatment, follow-up care, or health administration.

“To err is human to cover up is unforgivable and to fail to learn is inexcusable.”

Disclaimer- The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of M3 India.

About the author of this article: Dr Monish Raut is a practising super specialist from New Delhi.