Blood bank, pathology laboratory, storage rooms, etc. are integral parts of a hospital’s infrastructure. It is not possible to provide care and safety to patients without sound functioning of these crucial units. Hence, it is the hospital’s legal and moral obligation to ensure that these divisions function at their best at all times, which unfortunately, did not happen in this case.

In this day and age when hospitals and doctors are dragged to court even for a bout of coughing and hiccough, taking a ‘satisfaction certificate’ from patients after discharge could be one practical and positive way to avoid any adverse ruling.

Hospitals and nursing homes are bound by law to provide relevant emergency services to patients that may require them during their stay. It is advisable to refer the patient to a higher centre without wasting any time in case emergency services that he / she may require are not available.

Healthcare providers know that taking an informed consent before an intervention or procedure is a legal necessity. However, problems often arise when there is confusion about whose consent is to be obtained – the patient or his / her family / attendants?

A hospital is legally responsible for the safety of patents at all times – even when the patient is on a wheelchair! This legal diktat brought one of the reputed hospitals on its knees for not following this most basic tenet of patient safety.

Patients ought to be referred to a relevant specialist / higher centre immediately when the diagnosed ailment goes beyond the treating doctor’s expertise. Any delay in such instance is considered negligence – and this case is an excellent example of the fact.

Possibility of a serious ailment can sink even the strongest of hearts. All hell breaks loose if the suspected ailment is cancer. It can drive a patient to despair and even depravity, as this case exemplifies.