What
constitutes medical negligence is now well established [Jacob Mathew v. State of
Punjab, (2005) 6 SCC 1] and essentially three
principles are required to be followed: (i) Whether the doctor in
question possessed the medical skills expected of an ordinary skilled
practitioner in the field at that point of time; (ii) Whether the doctor
adopted the practice (of clinical observation diagnosis – including diagnostic
tests and treatment) in the case that would be adopted by such a doctor of
ordinary skill in accord with (at least) one of the responsible bodies of
opinion of professional practitioners in the field and (iii) whether the
standards of skills/knowledge expected of the doctor, according to the said
body of medical opinion, were of the time when the events leading to the
allegation of medical negligence occurred and not of the time
when the dispute was being adjudicated. (PARA 9)
National Consumer disputes redressal commission - FIRST APPEAL NO. 279 OF 2007 - Smt.
V. Bhavani Vs. Dr.
S. Siva Subramaniam.
No comments:
Post a Comment