Liability Rx

The recent Supreme Court judgement on the extent of a doctor8217;s liability in the event of a patient8217;s death while under treatment h...

The recent Supreme Court judgement on the extent of a doctor8217;s liability in the event of a patient8217;s death while under treatment has created a stir. The medical fraternity has welcomed the ruling, consumer fora have tried to explain it dispassionately and the general public has been left confused. What it boils down to is this: The judgement may have given the benefit of the doubt to the medical community but it doesn8217;t deprive a lay person of his or her rights. Here8217;s how:

What did the court say?
The judgement pertained to the interpretation of Section 304A of the Indian Penal Code, which deals with 8216;8216;causing death by rash or negligent act not amounting to culpable homicide8217;8217;. Sec 304A stipulates a two-year jail term for those found guilty. However, the court said doctors would not face criminal charges if the patient dies because of negligence or error of judgement. It will be a criminal offence only in case of 8216;8216;gross ignorance or negligence8217;8217;.

Does that mean the doctor gets away scot-free?
Not really8212;He or she can still be sued for damages. 8216;8216;Mere inadvertence or some degree of want of adequate care and caution might create civil liability,8217;8217; the court said in the same judgement.

So what then are a patient8217;s rights?
Several, says Ashok Agarwal, a Delhi-based activist lawyer with Social Jurist see box. One in particular is related to the court8217;s judgement:

The right to be given full and accurate information about the nature of one8217;s illnesses, diagnostic procedures, the proposed treatment and the costs involved, to enable the patient to make a decision that affects any one of these elements.

		You Ask, They Answer

			Patients are entitled to: 8226; A healthy and safe environment 8226; Accessible health care 8226; Timely emergency care at any working health care facility, regardless of ability to pay 8226; Provision of special needs for newborn infants, children, pregnant women, the aged, disabled persons and those living with HIV or AIDS 8226; Confidentiality and privacy regarding information concerning one8217;s health 8226; Right to refuse treatment, provided refusal does not endanger the health of others 8226; A second opinion 8226; Right to continuity of care 8226; Right to complain about health services and to have such complaints investigated

There are some responsibilities too, presumably?
Yes, there are some things a patient must do/say:
8226; Advise the health care providers about his or her wishes with regard to his or her death
8226; Comply with the prescribed treatment or rehab procedures
8226; Enquire about the related costs of treatment and/or rehab and to arrange for payment
8226; Maintain health records in his or her possession and to provide these for diagnostic, treatment, rehabilitation or counselling purposes

What about the Consumer Protection Act?
Experts say the court ruling has no implication on the patient8217;s rights under the CPA. A 1995 judgement in the case of Medical Council of India vs VPL Shantha and Ors said that a medical practitioner can be regarded as rendering service under section 21o of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986

Story continues below this ad

How does the Act work?
Broadly speaking, the Act gives the consumer the right to:
8226; Be protected against unfair trade practices or any unscrupulous exploitation
8226; Be heard and be assured that his or her interests will receive due consideration.