New Delhi: The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) has absolved a Thiruvananthapuram-based hospital and its doctor of charges of medical negligence in a case involving the treatment of a patient undergoing In-vitro Fertilization (IVF).
The NCDRC upheld the decision of the State Consumer Commission, which had earlier dismissed the complaint. The Apex Consumer Court noted that the patient was not admitted to the hospital at the time of her death and that a third-party clinic administered the injection on the day she passed away.
Case Background
The case dates back to 2003 when the complainant and his wife sought assistance from the hospital for conception after 11 years of marriage. Following counseling and tests, IVF treatment was initiated. On the second attempt, an embryo transfer was performed on April 19, 2006, and the results were positive per a BETA-HCG blood test.
The complainant alleged that after 22 days of bed rest, the patient was given estrogen and progesterone (Progynova) injections and advised to walk. Soon after, the patient collapsed and died. The post-mortem report, dated May 12, 2006, identified “Pulmonary Embolism” as the cause of death and noted that the patient was not pregnant at the time.
Claiming deficiency in care, the complainant accused the doctor of failing to provide proper post-treatment advice and demanded ₹50 lakh as compensation.
State Commission’s Findings
The State Commission dismissed the complaint, citing expert evidence that the patient likely did not adhere to prescribed bed rest. The Commission noted:
- The patient was not an inpatient at the hospital.
- Estrogen, a natural hormone, was administered as part of standard IVF protocols.
- Pulmonary embolism and Deep Vein Thrombosis (DVT) can occur silently and unpredictably, making it difficult to attribute negligence.
The Commission concluded that the complainant failed to prove any deficiency in service or error in the treatment provided.
Arguments Presented
The complainant alleged that:
- The injections should have been stopped as the BETA-HCG test indicated no pregnancy.
- The doctor failed to provide proper instructions regarding precautions.
- No medication was prescribed to address potential blood clots.
In response, the hospital and doctor argued:
- The patient and her husband were fully informed of IVF protocols and risks through counseling and an information brochure.
- The treatment followed standard protocols, and similar procedures had been successful in the past.
- The patient received the fatal injection from a third-party clinic, not the hospital.
- Pulmonary embolism is a rare complication of IVF, with an incidence rate of 2–3 cases per 10,000.
NCDRC Observations
The NCDRC relied on legal precedents, including the Supreme Court rulings in Jacob Mathew vs. State of Punjab and V. Kishan Rao vs. Nikhil Super Speciality Hospital, to define the standards of medical negligence.
The Commission emphasized that:
- Negligence must demonstrate a breach of duty that directly results in harm.
- The petitioner failed to prove that the doctor’s actions deviated from standard medical practices or caused the patient’s death.
- The doctrine of res ipsa loquitur (the act speaks for itself) did not apply in this case.
Verdict
The NCDRC dismissed the complaint, finding no evidence of medical negligence or breach of duty. The court reaffirmed that the standard of care provided by the hospital and doctor was consistent with accepted medical practices.
