Consumer is King » Death

Family members of victims of medical negligence get compensation of Rs. 5 lakh

ashish — Thu, 31 Dec 2009 20:17:34 +0000

When people go to hospitals for treatment, they suffer from 2 major problems:
- They do not know what exactly the problem they have, and have to depend on the doctor for explaining to them what the problem is
- When undergoing surgery or other treatment, they are leaving their lives in the hands of the doctor and have no way to figure out whether things have gone right or not. It could be that that the doctor is very busy, or something may go wrong in the setup in the operation theatre, or the anesthetic used was not administered properly; in all such cases, they have to depend on the doctor and his team.
In the past, it used to be that in most of the cases, everything went fine, but in some of the cases where the result was not so good, the treatment was faulty in a smaller percentage of such cases (in some cases, the operation not turning out successful was something that could not be avoided, but in other cases, there were certain specific avoidable reasons that led to the operation not being successful). The patient and relatives had no way of figuring out whether something went right or not, or if they were being told the truth.
Nowadays, things are becoming easier for patients – they can get second opinions from other doctors about the advisability of medical treatments, and are also able to ensure that they can ask for compensation in cases where they feel that they have been wronged; consider this case (link to article):

The Delhi Consumer Commission has upheld a lower forum order, directing a city-based hospital and its doctor to pay Rs five lakh compensation to the family of a victim of medical negligence. The commission noted that the neck movement and blood pressure of the patient was found to be normal before the operation but developed complications soon after the surgery.
The appellants contended that the family members were told about the risk associated with the operation and there were no negligence on their part as she died due to cardiac arrest. The commission said that from the medical tests of the deceased before the operation, it was clear that the patient was not suffering from any heart-related disease.

Apollo fined Rs. 5 lakh over a man’s death

ashish — Sat, 16 May 2009 20:20:02 +0000

Apollo Hospitals is one of the providers of premium medical care, charging top rates for their services and in turn providing excellent medical services. This is an expectation that people have when they are admitted to the hospital, so when the hospital screws up somewhere in this care and does harm to the patient, there is a lot of shock. And with an increasing tendency for people to file consumer forum issues when they believe that they have not been treated well, it is becoming more common for even the better hospitals to be pulled up when their services are found wanting (link to article):

The state consumer commission has directed Apollo Hospital to pay Rs 5 lakh compensation to the kin of a patient, who died in the hospital moments after he was brought in. In this case, 31-year-old Pradeep Kumar Saini, a father of two minor kids, was admitted in Apollo Hospital on June 16, 2003 in a drowsy state. After examination, it was found that he had no medical history and his condition was stable. In fact, the family was told that he was to be discharged shortly. At no stage was it indicated that the condition of the patient was deteriorating.
Presiding over the commission, Justice JD Kapoor said that Apollo Hospital was guilty of negligence and deficiency in service for keeping the patient unattended for few hours and not making doctors available for immediate treatment.

This is not a state run hospital where patients sometimes have to wait for doctors to attend to them because of a lot of rush; premium hospitals are supposed to provide the required medical attention as and when required, and their reputations are based on these.

Supreme Order ratifies compensation against Airport Authorities of India

ashish — Fri, 01 Feb 2008 10:43:00 +0000

In an important judgment, the Supreme Court of India has ratified the order of the National Consumer Commission that had awarded an overall sum of Rs. 38.04 lakhs (including interest) compensation against the Airports Authority of India for dereliction leading to the death of a child. In a horrific incident on December 13, 1999, a family arriving at Delhi’s Indira Gandhi International Airport saw their 7 year old daughter getting sucked into the gap at the end of the escalator and getting crushed to death. It was an incident that sparked a lot of outrage, more so, because this was an incident that could have been avoided.

The Supreme Court on Thursday upheld an order of the national consumer commission awarding Rs 38.04 lakh compensation to the mother of a seven-year-old girl who died after she was sucked into an escalator at Delhi’s international airport in December 1999. The order marked a stinging rebuke to the Airports Authority of India which, despite strong evidence pointing to its callousness in not maintaining the escalator, had sought to dispute the compensation granted to Geeta Jethani.
While awarding the compensation, the commission had criticized the cussed attitude of AAI in questioning the compensation for a death which clearly resulted from its apathy, saying the case pointed to the extent “we have developed the tendency to deny the obvious, in litigation”. “Except admitting the trapping of a young child in the escalator, the AAI has tried to dispute its liability and deficiency in service. We do not know when we will change our jurisprudence which encourages such attitude of denials and protracts litigation and increases burden on adjudicating forums/courts,” Justice M B Shah, chairman of the commission, had said in his verdict.

The whole incident was extremely shocking when it happened. From my memory, investigation seemed to show that the escalator was not being maintained properly, and in addition, there was no immediate button to stop the escalator. It seems a default now that every escalator has a Red stop button that will immediately stop the escalator, but such was not the case at that point of time. It was only after that incident was there increased focus on making sure that the escalator can stop in an emergency.
The other major problem that becomes evident from this case is that nature of Government enterprises. There is an incredible amount of lethargy, work-saving, and passing the buck that happens. This very rarely gets pointed out since these are after all Government enterprises, but one hopes that more judgments like these will ensure that even Government run enterprises are responsible for ensuring safety at their premises and for ensuring that customer service is their motto. This is hopeful thinking, but one rarely knows whether such an attitude change could happen.