Kerala Commission Exonerates Hospital and Doctor from Medical Negligence Claims

Background of the Case

Thiruvananthapuram: The State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission of Kerala has recently cleared a hospital and a doctor based in Kasargode from allegations of medical negligence that allegedly led to the death of a newborn and the subsequent hysterectomy of the mother. The case dates back to 2009 when the patient was admitted to the hospital for delivery.

Details of the Incident

Following the birth, the patient lost consciousness but regained it shortly after. She was informed that her baby was healthy. However, the next day, she learned from her husband that the newborn had died. The complainant alleged that despite the doctor’s initial claims of a normal delivery with no issues for both mother and child, she was only notified of the child’s death the following day. It was also claimed that her husband was told an hour post-delivery about the baby’s serious condition, but this information was only provided after they requested to see the child.

Concerns were raised about the hospital’s insistence that the patient did not require discharge, despite her inability to control frequent urination. Eventually, she was transferred to another doctor in Kasargod for further treatment. Afterward, she was referred to Father Muller’s Hospital in Mangalore, where doctors recommended a hysterectomy to protect her life.

Allegations of Medical Negligence

The complainant alleged that inquiries at Father Muller’s Hospital revealed that the hysterectomy was necessary due to medical negligence from the initial treating doctor. However, due to the complainant’s absence and the lack of a Chief Affidavit, the consumer court based its decision solely on the evidence provided.

Findings of the Consumer Court

The consumer court reviewed the discharge card from the treating hospital, noting that the complainant was admitted on December 7, 2019, and discharged on December 9, 2019. Records indicated a diagnosis of “cephalic presentation with term pregnancy in labour G2 P1 L2” and mentioned that the newborn suffered from severe birth asphyxia and could not be revived.

The Commission found that the treating doctor had referred the complainant to a higher medical center due to complications following delivery. Clinical notes documented that the patient experienced significant issues post-delivery, including incontinence of urine and pain, leading to further medical intervention.

Subsequent treatment at another facility revealed a “suspicious rupture of anterior cervix” and large amounts of fluid in the peritoneum, culminating in a diagnosis of “bladder rupture with uterine rupture” at Father Muller Medical College Hospital.

Conclusion of the Commission

The Commission concluded that there was no medical negligence on the part of the treating hospital or the doctor. It stated, “The medical records do not show any medical negligence on the part of the opposite parties.” It emphasized that the complainant bore the burden of proof to demonstrate negligence, which was not established in this case.

The Commission ultimately dismissed the complaint, noting that the complainant failed to provide sufficient evidence to warrant relief.

To view the full order, follow this link:
Kerala SCDRC Order

Related News

Also Read: Urinary Catheterization Death Case: Consumer Court Rejects Rs 18 Lakh Deficiency Claim Against Delhi’s Hospital and Surgeon.