Today’s Highlight
Free Medicare
There is no free lunch in the hospital if one is treated free and no compensation is due on account of medical negligence –as explained in “No Negligence in Free Medicare?”
Bob’s Banter
Rahul on Train!
Bob’s has his take on the recent ride of Rahul Gandhi in Mumbai’s suburban train in “Platform 5..!”
For more insightful articles by Bob, hit his website – www.bobsbanter.com
CocktailPlaza
Also have a look at our trivia/sublime, random quotes, Indiana and recycled humour in this section – as and when we schedule them afresh – or in the archives.
The Laughter CD is on the website for you to view/ download.
The CD on laughter is loaded in the archives of this website for free downloading and use. Alert your friends who may be interested.
Stay with us and help us to grow!
- John B. Monteiro
No Negligence in Free Medicare?
By John B. Monteiro
Better to hunt in fields for health unbought,
Than face this doctor for a nauseous draught.
The wise for cure on exercise depend;
God never made his work for men to mend.
- John Dryden, English poet (1631-1700).
In the last posting on this site, we discussed how doctors have become extra-cautious in handling patients so as not to risk damaging medical negligence litigation. The potential conflict environment between doctors and patients has benefited third parties. In USA, we have what are called ambulance-chasing lawyers. Here also we have medical litigation lawyers who prod the bereaved relatives of the dead (in hospital) to trod the litigation route. Amidst the eroding doctor-patient relationship, the insurance sector has emerged a clear winner. Almost 3,000 doctors of the 6,000 medical consultants registered with the Association of Medical Consultants are covered under Professional Indemnity Insurance. The rest of those practicing in vulnerable branches of medicine, like gynaecology, orthopedics and cosmetology, have personal cover. However, if one has to avoid litigation for medical negligence, there is a safety valve in the form of free treatment – for medical negligence doesn’t apply to free treatment. But, first the facts.
The Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission recently ruled that a person alleging medical negligence was not liable to get any compensation under the Consumer Protection Act if the treatment was carried out free-of-cost at a public hospital.
In 1997, the complainant, Sudhakar Shetty, a Mumbai resident, sought treatment from the city’s KEM (King Edward Memorial – as many would not know the original full name) Hospital after his family doctor diagnosed that gangrene was setting in his left big toe because of shoe-bite. Shetty claimed that at KEM, after doctors amputated his left big toe, swelling and pain in his left leg increased considerably. Five days later, the doctors, after examining him, concluded that the gangrene has spread to his knee and that the left leg would have to be amputated from below the knee. Shetty got himself admitted to a private hospital for the amputation.
In his complaint filed in 1999, Shetty said that he lost use of his left leg because of negligence of doctors at KEM. He maintained that he had incurred expenses of Rs. 65,000 and lost five months’ salary amounting to Rs. 40,000. He blamed the doctors for deficiency of service and demanded Rs.1.1 million as compensation. Countering the charges, the KEM doctor argued that the complaint be dismissed as the patient was treated free-of-cost during his stay in the hospital and hence he was not a consumer.
Upholding the doctor’s argument, the Commission ruled that that the complainant did not fall under the definition of consumer under Section 2(1) (d) (ii) of Consumer Protection Act. It noted that Shetty had not produced any bill from KEM to show that he had paid for the treatment. The Commission also rejected the complaint on various other grounds. “Medical negligence on the part of the hospital or its doctors requires to be proved by the person who alleges But the complainant has nor adduced any evidence in terms of affidavit of expert from the field…They (KEM) had taken good post-operative care and there was no negligence in treating the complainant. Had he continued treatment at KEM, he would have recovered fully. But against medical advice, he took discharge from KEM and approached another hospital where his condition deteriorated and he had to lose his left leg.” The KEM doctors also claimed that Shetty had suppressed the fact that he was a patient of chronic uncontrolled diabetes and was alcoholic at the time he was admitted to KEM.
The subject is open to many views. What are yours? Over to you.
