Maharashtra's consumer dispute redressal commission held a reputed Mumbai hospital and one of its best haematologists guilty of providing faulty treatment to a three-year-old child in 2000, asking them to pay a compensation of Rs five lakh along with 9% interest rate from 2002. The court also asked them to pay a separate amount of Rs 25,000 towards the complainant's litigation cost.
Maharashtra's consumer dispute redressal commission held a reputed Mumbai hospital and one of its best haematologists guilty of providing faulty treatment to a three-year-old child in 2000, asking them to pay a compensation of Rs five lakh along with 9% interest rate from 2002. The court also asked them to pay a separate amount of Rs 25,000 towards the complainant's litigation cost.
The case dates back to the year 2000, when Vishakha Pujari, the three-year-old daughter of Ashok Pujari, started developing symptoms of leukaemia. After multiple medical consultations, the ailment was confirmed. Ashok Pujari took her to haemologist Dr. Mukesh Desai at Nanavati hospital.
However, at the time of injecting chemotherapy on the left arm of the baby, the needle went out of the vein. The medicines, which were to be administered intravenously as prescribed by the doctor, allegedly collected in the left elbow of the baby, causing tremendous pain. A big black spot formed at the left elbow. The child's hands were tied to a wooden pad and bandage applied, which remained for seven days. As a result, gangrene developed in the arm of the baby. She was then referred to Dr. Ketan Parikh, who immediately diagnosed the gangrene and operated on the baby. The child's hospital stay was prolonged for three months as the left elbow and ulna bone also got infected .
Two years after the treatment, the child passed away. Pujari then approached the forum and filed for compensation. However, the doctor and the hospital claimed that they were not responsible for the said incident.
The commission held them guilty of negligence. "It was the duty of the duo to take standard medical care in accordance with the accepted protocols, particularly when the ailment of cancer was detected and it was curable according to medical science. There is no reliable or acceptable evidence before us to indicate that the ailment suffered by the child was incurable. It was onus upon the duo to prove that the appropriate standard of care was taken to administer the appropriate medicines by adopting a standard protocol while the child was treated while administering the Chemotherapy to the child," the commission said.
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
)
)
)
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}