The brief facts are as follows. The complainant had problems with his nose and breathing. He turned to the Appellant`s doctor who, after the examination, recommended a septoplasty, which was performed at the second defendant`s hospital on August 18, 1999. According to the Claimant, after the operation, the pain worsened and the breathing problem persisted. Following the examination, the complainant was advised to take antibiotics for serious nasal infections. Despite taking these medications, the complainant received no relief and was transported to St. John`s Hospital. A computed tomography (CT) scan revealed that there was a deposit in the nasal cavity, for which an endoscopy was performed at St. John`s Hospital. The cotton gauze was removed from the nose on 28 November 2000.
In these circumstances, a complaint was filed with the State Commission concerning alleged medical negligence on the part of the applicant and the second defendant. After hearing the evidence and other documents, the State Commission found the second defendant guilty of medical negligence and ordered him to pay compensation of Rs. 1 lake with interest @ 6% p.a. from the date of appeal as well as the cost of Rs. 5000/-. The complainant`s doctor, aggrieved by this decision, appealed. In particular, and necessarily, the standard of care that clinicians can provide during the COVID-19 pandemic may differ significantly from standard medical practice that is not conditional emergency. In a crisis-free environment, the prevailing standard of medical care is focused on the needs of each patient and the principle of informed consent. However, in a public health emergency, such concentrated care may be impossible or discouraged due to (1) resource constraints and (2) the goal of saving as many lives as possible. Recently, medical science has seen exponential technological advances.
However, healthcare remains a very human undertaking. It is proven that mistakes often result not from a lack of knowledge, but from the senseless application of untested habits and the interference of untested emotions. [13] States have various liability protections that could apply to a physician providing emergency care, particularly those who volunteer. For example, 50 states have Good Samaritan laws that grant immunity to licensed physicians who act in good faith and provide free care at the scene of an accident. The hospital`s liability for medical negligence may be direct liability or vicarious liability. Direct responsibility refers to the inability of the hospital itself to provide a safe and appropriate environment for treatment as promised. The enforcement agent`s liability is an employer`s liability for the negligent acts of its employees. An employer is liable not only for its own acts of commission and omission, but also for the negligence of its employees, as long as the act takes place within the scope and extent of their employment. [7] (1) In a claim for damages alleging medical malpractice by or against a person or party, the total amount of non-material loss recoverable by all plaintiffs arising out of the medical malpractice of all defendants shall not exceed $280,000, except as a result of the negligence of one or more defendants, one or more of the following exceptions: as determined by the court in accordance with section 6304: In this case, damages for intangible losses cannot exceed $500,000.00: (a) The applicant is hemiplegia, paraplegic or quadriplegic, resulting in a permanent loss of function of one or more limbs caused by one or more of the following: (i) a brain injury.
(ii) spinal cord injury. (b) The applicant has a permanent impairment in cognitive abilities that renders him or her incapable of making independent and responsible life decisions and is permanently unable to perform normal activities of daily living independently. (c) there is permanent loss or damage to a reproductive organ resulting in reproductive incapacity. Informed consent means that the patient expressly agrees to the proposed medical intervention. Informed consent is more than just consent. In order for a patient to give informed consent to a medical procedure, the health care provider must inform the patient of all risks and complications that may reasonably occur during the procedure, even minor ones. In addition, the attending physician should talk about available treatment alternatives and what happens if treatment is not performed. Only when a patient is actually informed about the potential risks of a medical intervention can they give informed consent to the procedure.
[24] The treating physician must understand that the patient consented to the procedure and not to all medical errors made during treatment. Failure to obtain informed consent may be a form of medical negligence or result in a cause of action for the medical battery. Section 194 of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (PDF, HIPAA) extends the Federal Tort Claims Act`s eligibility for liability protection to volunteer health professionals in qualified free clinics, provided the clinic sponsors the physician by filing an application with the Health Resources and Services Administration. Medical literature: In the case of P. Venkata Lakshmi v. Dr. Y. Savita Devi, II (2004) CPJ 14 (NC), the National Commission found that the State Commission should have taken into account the medical documentation submitted by the complainant, and the State Commission dismissed the complaint on the grounds that there was no expert evidence and dismissed the case.
CSC compliance can therefore expose health care providers and facilities to significant costs and burdens, including the risk of civil and criminal liability. However, issues of legal liability during a pandemic precede this particular emergency. Any exemplary damages awarded to a client in a tort action based on health care or professional services shall be paid into a special fund that may be used, at the discretion of the Administrator of Guam Memorial Hospital, to improve medical services in the territory of Guam. While existing state laws provide liability protection for physicians providing emergency care, „they do not clearly immunize decisions to retain or remove ventilators” — a decision clinicians and healthcare facilities may face during the COVID-19 pandemic. A patient who turns to a doctor expects medical treatment with all the knowledge and skills that the doctor possesses to alleviate his medical problem. The relationship takes the form of a contract that retains the essential elements of tort liability. A physician has certain obligations to his or her patient, and a breach of either of these obligations gives rise to a claim for negligence against the physician. The physician is required to obtain the patient`s prior informed consent before carrying out diagnostic tests and therapeutic treatments. Doctors` services are covered by the provisions of the Consumer Protection Act 1986 and a patient can seek redress in the consumer courts. Case law is an important source of law in the assessment of various issues of negligence arising from medical treatment.
Lack of diagnosis is the main reason a physician is sued for medical malpractice. A tech-savvy patient may give/explain/ask for more information, or less psychologically demanding patients may withhold the information and make diagnosis more difficult. For physicians, it is essential to develop an asset protection plan in addition to professional liability insurance. A malpractice lawsuit not only reduces a physician`s ability to make a living in medicine, but can also harm or destroy assets earned and invested. There are two categories of professional liability, such as personal or individual liability: This bears the liability risk of the doctor and his qualified assistant. Errors and Omissions Policy: This policy applies to an institution, nursing home or hospital and its staff. If a physician owns a hospital or facility, it is recommended to establish both an individual policy and an error policy, as the hospital or facility is a separate legal entity and can often be a party to a medico-legal matter. [7] If a patient does not provide a proper medical history, the physician cannot be held responsible for the consequences. In S.
Tiwari v. Dr. Pranav 1(1996) CPJ 301 (NC), it was asserted that a tooth had been extracted without proper testing. When the bleeding continued, the doctor administered an analgesic. Although the patient had a blood pressure of 130/90, he did not give the doctor his proper medical history. The National Commission upheld the findings of the State Commission and dismissed the complaint on the grounds that the patient had not provided a correct medical history and follow-up if necessary. Before prescribing medications, a doctor should be aware of all medications the patient is taking, including over-the-counter medications and alternative medications. Doctors should emphasize the importance of taking the medication only as prescribed. Patients should be advised that if they feel that a drug is not having the desired effect, they should contact their doctor immediately. An important way to prevent accidental drug interactions is to work with hospital pharmacists.