Forgery of Medical Records – what recourse ?

 

  • Medical Negligence – a crime committed behind closed doors, on the uninformed and the unconscious !!

  • By organizations with whole teams of lawyers ready to resort to all tactics to suppress justice opposing complainants generally not aware of even the basics of law, what to talk  of medical jurisprudence ! 

  • By those who think they can even commit forgery of medical records and get away – and mostly do ! Because the hapless patient has no recourse !

  • With others conspiring  to help out their “brothers” !

 

Yet, in some cases, justice is done. As in this case. Sometimes God intervenes..others can only blame past sins, perhaps ?

This when the complainant is herself a doctor – imagine then the status of non-doctors !

Why doesn’t the Consumer Forum have a SEPARATE BENCH , with medically competent people, for these category of cases ?

These excerpts hereunder taken from :

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/delhi/botched-up-operation-victim-doc-gets-rs-80-lakh-in-damages/articleshow/58618109.cms

Emphasis is mine. Read on, cry, and hope you are never in these hapless situations !

  • The Delhi State Consumer Commission recently indicted the private hospital and its eye surgeon for medical negligence and deficiency of service, asking them to pay compensation and damages of nearly Rs 80 lakh, for botching an eye operation that led to loss of vision of Dr Prakash Sharma.
  • The commission, presided by N P Kaushik, held Dr Sharad Lakhotia and Talwar Medical Centre guilty and asked them to pay Rs 19 lakh at 12% interest and Rs 20 lakh at 12% interest respectively. Interest will be charged from 1999, when the complaint was filed.
  • The consumer watchdog also concluded that both the doctor and the hospital fudged medical records relating to the case to escape liability. Sharma had alleged that the hospital forged her husband’s signature to claim he had given consent before the surgery.
  • The commission was surprised that despite evidence of fabrication and concealment of documents, an in-house inquiry by Delhi government’s health department gave the doctor and the hospital a clean chit even while admitting in the report that it did not have access to details of operation notes. An earlier complaint by to the directorate health services, Delhi, had led to the constitution of a two member enquiry committee by the Gurur Nanak Eye Centre.
  • “In the absence of surgery notes, enquiry committee could not have arrived at a conclusion that there was no negligence on the part of the treating doctors,” the commission pointed out, faulting the panel for giving an ex-parte order without hearing Sharma.
  • Taking a stern view of the connivance of the doctor with the eye hospital located in Greater Kailash the Commission asked the Medical Council of India (MCI) and Delhi government’s directorate of health services to take action against him and the hospital for deficient service. ( Would be interesting to see exactly WHAT action will be taken by these esteemed bodies .. how many doctors have been faulted by MCI til date ? )
  • Through advocate Mohit Mudgal, the woman doctor informed the commission that she underwent a cataract surgery in 1998 at Talwar Medical Centre after which she lost vision in her left eye, forcing her to stop her medical career.
  • Complainant (Sharma) by profession is an obstetrician and gynaecologist. She has been deprived of conducting surgeries on her patients. She became a social recluse after having lost sight in the left eye,” the commission noted.
  • Dr Sharma, widowed soon after the incident, welcomed the verdict. “I feel fortunate to have seen justice served in my lifetime. My husband, Wing Commander V K Sharma was working hard on this case on the day he passed away. Wherever he is, I feel he will be happy to see his efforts have finally brought the guilty to justice.”

For those interested in seeing the Court Judgement in full, here are the relevant details to click on :

IN THE STATE COMMISSION: DELHI

(Constituted under Section 9 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986)

Date of Decision: 27.04.2017

Complaint Case No. 283/2001

If you are a sufferer of medical negligence – and need some advice on how the law works ,  talk to me – I  would be happy to help ! And if you have any helpful suggestions to offer, you too are most welcome – comment in !




Risks- does your Doctor tell ? If not, it still is yours !

Risks-is Your Surgeon gambling with your life ?
Risks-is Your Surgeon gambling with your life ?

 

Is your Doctor playing Dice with you ? The  Risks are yours !

It is bounden duty of a Doctor to tell his patient pros and cons – including Risks – of treatment suggested by him. Plain common sense, backed by law and several cases.

However, sometimes the Doctor/ Surgeon errs grossly on this. Reasons ? Money or sheer incompetence / overconfidence. Who pays ? The Patient. For a lifetime, many times…

While there is a whole plethora of cases similar, they still do not seem to stop. In one of the recent ones, Orissa High Court has again observed :

” It is the duty of a doctor to explain his patient or relatives chances of success and the risk of failure of the suggested treatment and inform them about the foreseeable risks and possible negative effects of the treatment, keeping in mind the patient’s specific condition….”
Another interesting observation :
” A common man treats the doctor as ‘Dhanvantari’.He has tremendous amount of confidence on the doctor. The comforting and reassuring words of the doctor are very powerful and sometimes it creates miracle for the patients and strengthen them to fight from within. That is why the doctors should shoulder their responsibility with all care and caution, rise to the occasion, believe in hard work and discipline and behave with all sensibility not thinking only of their Everestian interest of amassing huge wealth burying larger collective interest of common men which would strengthen the patient-doctor relationship.”

The Court went on to explain that it it was the duty of the petitioner to explain the deceased or at least the complainant, chances of success and the risk of failure of the suggested treatment and inform them about the foreseeable risks and possible negative effects of the treatment keeping in mind the patient’s specific condition.

The Court referring to Alister Anthony Pareira v. State of Maharashtra,  (2012) 2 SCC 648 held that there were no prima facie materials for commission of an offence under Section 304 Part II IPC. However, the materials were sufficient under S. 304-A IPC. The petition was disposed of with the direction to trial court that it was free to assess the evidence which would come on record during trial.

Read more at: http://www.livelaw.in/doctors-must-explain-risk-suggested-treatment-patients-orissa-hc/
or at :
http://blog.scconline.com/post/2017/03/09/orissa-high-court-duties-of-doctor-towards-patients-include-telling-them-about-the-risks-of-suggested-treatments/

The original order is here :

http://lobis.nic.in/ddir/ori/SKS/judgement/27-02-2017/SKS27022017CRLREV7582013.pdf

Download (SKS27022017CRLREV7582013.pdf, PDF, 196KB)

Want to share  /comment/offer help/ask for help directly to me ? Use this form please ! For public comments, go below the post. DO share on with your groups, Facebook and all.
Name :*
E-mail:*
Location and Mobile Number :*
Subject:*
Message:*
Word Verification:



Ghost Surgery may kill you ! Read on to know what can / does happen, more than you may think !

Ghost Surgery - a crime performed by Surgeons behind closed doors of an Operation Theater on an Unconscious Patients
Ghost Surgery – a despicable crime !

 Ghost Surgery – A Crime performed on the unconscious !

Medical Definition of ghost surgery:  the practice of performing surgery on another physician’s patient by arrangement with the physician but unknown to the patient.

This is a DIRECT, PERSONAL experience, not hearsay, which is ongoing. In case you are / or know  Public Minded Lawyers willing and capable to take this and other similar causes to Supreme Court , let us talk – or share this post with them so that they may contact me direct using form hereunder. In any case I request you to share this post in your groups, Whatsapp , LinkedIn, FaceBook , Twitter, Google Plus etc. etc.  – simply paste the weblink http://lawforall.in/ghost-surgery/ therein – or use any of the sharing buttons provided below. Thanks a LOT. You may save some people’s lives !

Medical Negligence is a crime VERY difficult to prove since generally done behind closed doors of an Operation Theater. The guilty NEVER admit to their guilt, and even if caught go scot free mostly – – numbers speak for themselves ! If the trend continues, next time it could be you/yours/me/mine ! It has already been for my family and we are still suffering !

The  US Position :

No “malice” or intent to injure, however, is required to establish battery in general or specifically, “ghost surgery.” In Perna v. Pirozzi, 92 N.J. 446, 457 A.2d 431 (1983), the Supreme Court held that such a battery results when a medical procedure is performed by a “substitute” doctor regardless of good intentions. The Court there took notice of standards published by the Judicial Council of the American Medical Association, which read:

To have another physician operate on one’s patient without the patient’s knowledge and consent is a deceit. The patient is entitled to choose his own physician and he should be permitted to acquiesce in or refuse to accept the substitution. The surgeon’s obligation to the patient requires him to perform the surgical operation: (1) within the scope of authority granted by the consent to the operation; (2) in accordance with the terms of the contractual relationship; (3) with complete disclosure of all facts relevant to the need and the performance of the operation; and (4) to utilize his best skill in performing the operation. It should be noted that it is the operating surgeon to whom the patient grants consent to perform the operation. The patient is entitled to the services of the particular surgeon with whom he or she contracts. The surgeon, in accepting the patient is obligated to utilize his personal talents in the performance of the operation to the extent required by the agreement creating the physician-patient relationship. He cannot properly delegate to another the duties which he is required to perform personally.

……Ghost surgery “remains a battery even if performed skillfully and to the benefit of the patient.”

==========

What does Indian Law say on this ? Are you / anyone you know a Sufferer on this/any other aspect of Medical Negligence ? Contact me using form hereunder to share your experiences, get and give help and advice to eradicate the malaise of Medical Negligence ! Thanks a LOT and Be Well !

Name :*
E-mail:*
Location and Mobile Number :*
Subject:*
Message:*
Word Verification: