Medical Negligence

Medical profession is the one of the noblest professions among all other profession in India. For a patient, the doctor is like God. And, the God is infallible. But that is what the patient thinks. In reality, doctors are human beings. And, to err is human. Doctors may commit a mistake. Doctors may be negligent. The support staff may be careless. Two acts of negligence may give rise to a much bigger problem. It may be due to gross negligence. Anything is possible. Medical Negligence consists of two words ‘Negligence’ and ‘Medical, where negligence is essentially the breach of a legal duty that is carelessness in a matter in which the law mandates carefulness and Medical Negligence then means that A person who holds himself out as ready to give medical advice or treatment impliedly undertakes that he is possessed of skill and knowledge for the purpose. Such a person, whether he is medical practitioner or not, who is consulted by a patient, owes him certain duties, namely a duty of care in deciding whether he undertakes the case; a duty of care in deciding what treatment to give and duty of care in his administration of that treatment. A breach of any these duties will support an action for negligence by patient. Negligence in the context of medical profession necessarily calls for a treatment with a difference. To infer rashness or negligence on the part of a professional, in particular a doctor, additional considerations apply.

So long as a doctor follows a practice acceptable to the medical profession of that day, he cannot be held liable for negligence merely because a better alternative course or method of treatment was also available or simply because a more skilled doctor would not have chosen to follow or resort to that practice or procedure which the accused followed. Slight neglect will surely not be punishable and ordinary neglect, as the name suggests, is also not to be punished. If we club these two, we get two categories: negligence for which the doctor shall be liable and that negligence for which the doctor shall not be liable. In most of the cases, the dividing line shall be quite clear, however, the problem is in those cases where the dividing line is thin. Hospitals liability with respect to medical negligence can be direct liability or vicarious liability. Direct liability refers to the deficiency of the hospital itself in providing safe and suitable environment for treatment as promised. Vicarious liability means the liability of an employer for the negligent act of its employees. An employer is responsible not only for his own acts of commission and omission but also for the negligence of its employees, so long as the act occurs within the course and scope of their employment. This liability is according to the principle of “respondeat superior‟ meaning „let the master answer‟. Employers are also liable under the common law principle represented in the Latin phrase, "qui facit per alium facit per se", i.e. the one who acts through another, acts in his or her own interests. As far as determining negligence is considered, courts have to depend on the advice of experts, except in cases of blatant violation of protocol and doing things which are considered to be unreasonable and imprudent. The level of subjectivity in such decisions is quite high and the purpose of law to be certain and specific is defeated to a large extent.

By Shipra Agrawal

Law Student