Courts vs Medical entities (Doctors, Hospitals etc.)

[whoru007]

Why the court should not go overboard while fixing the compensation for medical negligence.
[color=rgb(20,24,35);font-family:'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, Arial, 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif;]To many patients and relatives when a patient gets hospitalised doctor is looked as 'Bhagwan', as the patient gets better the doctor is looked as 'Insaan' and while paying bills the doctor is looked as 'Shaitan'!!![/color]

[color=rgb(20,24,35);font-family:'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, Arial, 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif;]'Sab ko sanmati de bhagwan'[/color]

“Failure to use due skill in diagnosis with the result that wrong treatment is given would be negligence”

Read more on, http://www.readability.com/articles/eibxsl2j

 

[hitech0101]

I have seen this case on a episode of savdhaan india and also read the above article. The above compensation may not totally justified but medicine is now a business I have read on newspapers how medical seats are auctioned for as high as 4 crore rupees. The medical system and hospitals are more greedy than ever. If i visit a doctor he spends like half a minute before prescribing many people loose their lives on medical negligence this type of amount should be a warning to doctors and hospitals about how they deal with patients.

 

[whoru007]

I agree, but the point is who decides what went and is wrong? From broader perspective what if it wasn't actually a doctor's fault after all the person is not God he can do his best and still be considered as negligence.
Under the scenario many hospitals will either start refusing Critical patients (management can make them to do so) or might start charging Extra sum of money which Rich people can only afford. There are other basic issues needed to be addressed first. There is very thin line when Doctor's Duty becomes Responsibility and people blame then every now and then. There should be solid structure to assess and prevent any such cases.
Law should be equal and universal no matter what is the case. Can a dead father of 5 children dies due to negligence get such a hefty compensation? Wasn't his life valuable? And the top question is on what basis Court decides any such compensation?

 

[hitech0101]

This case does not pertain to a critical patient but a patient who became critical due to actions of doctors what i learned from it the case got much worse after the patient was under treatment also a doctor should not prescribe more than the limit written in the medicine itself that was a big mistake .I can see from a doctor's point the case may have been rare in a pre internet,communication era but still if they were not confident they should have consulted within medical community and about the same issue you said i have read many hospitals refusing to admit accident victims anyway.
I do agree no one tell what was correct procedure or treatment but hey if a doctor gave me medicine for stomach ache when i have head ache he did do some thing wrong. This case may not be as simple but deviating from standard procedure for treatment does make it wrong do not know the extend to which you can apply it to this case but many doctors agree no blood test was taken and no iv drip when both were necessary.
Also the court can decide compensation based on merit of any given case i refuse to compare compensations for different cases as it would indicate law being unequal but each case should be treated separately.

 

[gadgetcrazy]

Why is the compensation given by government for people dying in blasts/ terrorist acts due to "negligence" of intelligence and security agencies far less? If it is not "negligence", why compensation at all?

 

[hitech0101]

I retierate no compensation can compensate for loss of life and comparing compensation scenarios is putting a value on the loss. Once again all compensation scenarios are different if you are in a court you cannot argue someone else got a lower/higher compensation simply because each case will be treated on its merit and in domain of law and not with comparison to other cases which deny a fair oppurtunity to explore the aspects of the case.
As for the topic started it pertained to the victim and the doctors treating the victim.As for acts of terrorism they are acts of war on citizens of a country and a country is a complex system run by complex mechanisms you can call it negligence or failure you still won't be able to pinpoint a single institution within the government as they are interdependent.

 

[gadgetcrazy]

because our governments and agencies are not accountable. iirc, people had sued the us government for 9/11 debacle and its investigation.
Coming back to the point in question, sadly, the general belief is that if anything goes wrong in a hospital it is because of negligence and never because the disease/ condition in question was incorrectable. No point discussing.

 

[hitech0101]

Our government should be made more accountable all they do is play the blamegame when something like this happens. The idea of hospital negligence may come from several reasons which may include the patients age kind of illness and the attitude of doctors towards the patient .Not to offend old people but when its just more acceptable when a old person passes away than maybe a child or a young person. I guess the grief is powerful enough to blame the doctors for the death.