Removal of stones in gall bladder without consent of complainant is against medical ethics & constitute ‘medical negligence’

Arti Vs Dr. Gagandeep Goyal & 3 Ors (NCDRC Delhi)

Conclusion:  In present facts of the case, the NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION NEW DELHI (NCDRC) observed that removal of the gall bladder instead of conducting laparoscopic surgery to remove the stones in the gall bladder without the consent of the complainant was incorrect and against medical ethics and hence the case was held to be under the ambit of ‘medical negligence’.

Facts: In present facts of the case, the revision petition was filed under section 21 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 which assails the order dated 05.05.2016 of the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Punjab, Chandigarh allowing the appeal and dismissing order dated 28.01.2013 of the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Bhatinda.

The brief facts of the case, according to the petitioner, was that she was incorrectly diagnosed and wrongly operated upon by the respondents for the removal of gall bladder and insertion of a stent in the central bile duct (CBD) of the liver instead of a perforated appendix which resulted in medical complications requiring repeated hospitalization and resulting in her getting bedridden after incurring huge expenditure of Rs 2,54,000/-. It is stated that on 26.04.2011 she had consulted respondent no 2, for pain in the right side of the abdomen and was advised ultrasound test based on which removal of gall bladder stones through laparoscopy was advised within 3-4 months. As she had an infant child, she again consulted respondent no. 2 on 20.11.2011 and was similarly advised after another ultrasound test. On 11.01.2012 she was advised emergency laparoscopic operation and was admitted under the said Respondent no.2. However, instead of laparoscopic surgery to remove the stones from the gall bladder, the gall bladder was itself removed without the consent of the petitioner or her husband and the petitioner was discharged on 13.01.2012. Due to persistence of pain she again visited the hospital on 15.01.2012 where she was admitted from 15.01.2012 to 25.01.2012. Several tests including another ultrasound test were done on 20.01.2012 and she was referred to respondent no. 1, for MRI and CT Scan. Respondent no. 1 inserted a stent in the Central Bile Duct (in short, ‘the CBD’) to close the leakage of bile. She was discharged on 25.01.2012 but states that there was no relief from the pain in the abdomen.

The petitioner contends that respondents 1 and 2 were negligent in diagnosing her and operating on her and that there was negligence in the treatment provided including the surgery which caused an expenditure of Rs 2,54,000/- on medicines, tests, doctors, diet, etc. and she had to be referred to DMC, Ludhiana. The initial wrong diagnosis and treatment caused her to undergo protracted treatment and has left her unable to move and do normal activities. She, therefore, claimed compensation of Rs 15 lakhs for loss of physical health, mental tension and permanent disability apart from other amounts such as fees charged by respondents 1 & 2.

Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.