Not adhering to advice. Unwilling to follow the instructions. Reluctant to one’s own detriment. Some patients will display such indifference and yet sue the doctors as if they will be cured merely by visiting them.

Any complicated case that needs immediate attention and round the clock monitoring must not be taken lightly. Most hospitals adhere to critical care norms, however, this case is of a hospital that delayed in providing critical care to a child in dire need of it. What followed was neither good for the little one nor for the hospital.

Some patients and their relatives will go to any extent to blame the doctors and claim compensation. Thankfully our robust judicial system can sieve the facts from fiction, ensuring that healthcare practitioners do not suffer due to ridiculous imaginations.

It is better to admit the mistakes that may have happened during treatment rather than covering them up. Courts draw adverse inference on such behaviour, and this case is an apt example of this fact.

A doctor was recently held negligent and ordered to pay three lakh rupees as compensation. He was held negligent for not referring the patient ‘immediately’ to a relevant specialist upon diagnosis of cancer.

It is a doctor’s responsibility to check the quality, effectiveness, etc. of an implant before inserting the same. Law is very clear on this aspect. Any complication arising due to defect of such an implant is negligence.