The Delhi High Court recently ruled that medical negligence cannot be proven solely based on dissatisfaction or claims about the “expected standard of care”. The court emphasized that there must be evidence showing that a doctor’s performance fell below the level expected from a competent practitioner in similar circumstances. This ruling came in the case of a petition filed against doctors at Max Super Specialty Hospital, Delhi, concerning the death of a woman diagnosed with systemic lupus erythematosus and haematemesis in October 2016.
Case Details
The petitioner’s claim was that the administration of 850mcg of fentanyl over a brief period caused the death of his wife, alleging that this dosage resulted in poisoning. The Delhi Medical Council (DMC) had initially found the two doctors responsible for professional negligence and issued a warning. The DMC also directed them to undergo emergency medicine training at a recognized hospital for a month.
However, the National Medical Commission (NMC), after reviewing the doctors’ records, concluded that there was insufficient evidence to establish negligence. The NMC’s peer review considered detailed records on drug dosage calculations based on the patient’s health and weight. Despite this, the petitioner challenged the NMC’s decision, arguing negligence.
Court’s Conclusion
The Delhi High Court reviewed the case and found no grounds to challenge the decisions made by the DMC or NMC. It noted that both medical bodies, being composed of experts in the field, had carefully reviewed the case and provided valid conclusions. The court concluded that the findings of these bodies could not be dismissed unless proven to be arbitrary or unlawful.
The court acknowledged the petitioner’s loss and the earnestness of his claim but emphasized that medical decisions should not be judged by predetermined expectations of outcomes or procedures. The court added that doctors must show reasonable diligence, but their actions should be assessed in the context of the patient’s complex medical profile rather than accusations of professional misconduct.
Key Takeaway
The court’s decision underscores that medical negligence claims require substantial evidence of deviation from standard care, and decisions made by medical bodies should be respected unless there is clear evidence of wrongdoing or illegality.
