Latest Articles
Back
Medical Negligence
Medical Negligence
Any person engaged in some particular profession is supposed to have the knowledge and skill needed for the purpose. Also he has a duty to exercise reasonable care in the conduct of his duties. A surgeon or anaesthetist will be judged by the standard of an average practitioner of class to which he belongs or holds himself out to belong. In the case of specialists, a higher degree of skill is needed. It is well settled that in cases of gross medical negligence the principle of res ipso loquitur can be applied.
The principle of res ipso loquitur is said to be a principle which is intended to assist a claimant who had done no fault is unable to produce evidence of the accident occurred.
When a medical practitioner attends to his patient, he owes him the following duties of care:-
- A duty of care in deciding whether to undertake the case
- A duty of care in deciding what treatment to give and
- A duty of care in the administration of the treatment.
A breach of any if the above mentioned duties gives a right of action for negligence to the patient. If the specialist does not care to attend to a patient admitted in the emergency ward of a hospital and the patient dies, the doctor would be liable to pay compensation.
In the case of medical negligence, the claimant has to prove the negligence of the concerned doctor staff and the hospital. Damages cannot be granted in cases where an injection was given to claimant in order to save him from the ill effects of rabied dog bite, injections led to reaction and as a result he became paralytic below waist. There being no negligence, the doctor, staffs or the hospital were held not be blamed.
For an action of medical negligence, casual relation between the alleged illness and the medical treatment has got to be proved. If no casual relationship can be proved between the illness and the alleged negligent treatment, the doctor cannot be held liable for negligence. The State would be liable vicariously for negligence on the part of doctors in conducting operations in camp of State.
In the case Lakshmi Rajan v. Malar Hospital Ltd.(III (1998)C.P.J 586), the complainant, a married woman, aged 40 years noticed the development of a painful lump in her breast. The opposite party while treating the lump, removed her uterus without justification. The hospital was required to pay 2,00,000 as compensation to the complainant.
The liability of the State to pay the compensation only arises when the negligence of the doctor is proved. If the plaintiff fails to prove the negligence, the State need not pay the compensation. In the case the doctor concerned was negligent per se as he had obviously failed in his professional duty to take care and, therefore, no further proof of negligence was needed.
Even though a doctor is not expected to save a patient’s life every time, he is expected to work with a duty of care. A negligence caused by a doctor or a medical staff can destroy that particular person’s life. Hence there must be sufficient care from the doctor’s part.
